Text

Forwards Documents Proposing Civil Penalty Action for 14 Violations Noted in 851112-1227 Safeguards Insp for Review & Concurrence.Nrc Concluded That Licensee Security Program Lacks Unified Mgt Direction
	ML20207G059
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	04/17/1986
From:	Bern Stapleton; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Axelrad J; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
Shared Package
ML20207F722	List: ML20207F719; ML20207F836; ML20207F858; ML20207F880; ML20207F907; ML20207F994; ML20207G016; ML20207G038; ML20207G059; NG-85-0667, Forwards Response to Concerns Noted in Insp Rept 50-341/85-18.Encl Withheld (Ref 10CFR73.21);
References
	FOIA-86-430 NUDOCS 8607220680
	Download: ML20207G059 (16)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:' .M N" ,P .s s. y-.m...-- sT' G r. U d la d V hlHT 6IV,ih q' - h*- APR 171986 bh. MEMORANDUM FOR: Jane A. Axelrad, Director, Enforcement Staff, IE FROM: Bernard W. Stapleton, Enforcem nt Specialist, Region III

SUBJECT:

FERMI - PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTIES 'The enclosed documents propose civil penalty action under the General Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions and are submitted for your review and concurrence. A special safeguards inspection conducted by Region III personnel during the period November 12 through December 27, 1985 at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant identified 14 violations for which we are proposing civil penalties. The violations have been divided into two categories: (1) violations which collectively represent unacceptable levels of management performance, and (2) a violation relating to records falsification by a security officer of records required by NRC regulations. The NRC inspection team concluded that the licensee's security program " lacked aequate unified management direction at several levels." During the Enforcement Conference on January 17, 1986, the licensee stated that they believed the potential violations and concerns were attributed to: (1) lack of detailed knowledge of security plan and procedure requirements; (2) lack of adequate monitoring systems to assure compliance with security plan and procedure requirements; (3) lack of effectiveness / aggressiveness in correcting self-identified adverse trends; and (4) lack of clearly understood security responsibilities. The licensee also identified an overall lack of sensitivity to security significance. We recommend that the civil penalty for the violations collectively representing unacceptable level of management performance be reduced by 50 percent of the base civil penalty for a Severity Level III violation. This reduction is justified by the licensee's extensive corrective actions, which included: (1) increased audit commitments; (2) trend analysis commitments pertaining to access control violations, maintenance support, and security reportable events; (3) increased security surveillance program; (4) detailed 100*4 audit of all authorized access records; (5) accelerated activity on Engineering Design Projects pertaining to security systems; and (6) preposed long term corrective actions to address adverse trends, organizational responsibilities, and review and revision of security plans. e607220680 860715 t M /l PDR FOIA / PUNTkNN86-430 PDR / VD n -- Eccletur? containt 47 ~ _ [.. $ 4 ~,ar;,y 77*Q[Y SAFEGUGCS INFCF.P.A T ,n ~" 8 Q u,,7 Upon separation this j pap is tecntrcile

I ,'g, r m o o n e, Q.8 Propann

* "'.. u t u d ass,wg,jgjjgj\\

Jane A. Axelrad 2 APR 171995 With respect to the falsification of records violation, we do not feel that mitigation or escalation of the base civil penalty is appropriate. Bernard W. Stapleton Enforcement Specialist

Enclosures:

1. Ltr to Licensee w/ Notice of Violation 2. Inspection Report No. 50-341/85047(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosures: J. Lieberman, ELD Regional Enforcement Coordinators RI, RII, RIV, and RIV i t Ecciosure cer.tains SAFEGUARDS INFCRP.ATIC'i 64N ,&j U.;en :e:. rat:cn t"s i >W cece is Ce:cntrc11ei RII RIIJ; RIII R If l

nd/lt ban on Stapleton Tambling 0 vis Kctpler i

.I tellt

:-- r

.f

d,1]?:

' n, - pib

V FIE F LLOWING IS A REPORT CF FI!OI!G FRCM A AUDIT CmPARIM 71I kH%N AAL DATA lF 4-22-86, WITH 71E SECURITI CPEPATIONAL REPORT CF 4-23-66. REFERECE ts'A'dCFI/F1".' (3 ) S10 ells 0 A 'ACf1AL OF 7 ZOhE DISCFIPDCIIS BE7KEH4 ' LEE 710 CWPARISON DOCOETTS. 'DE 2ONE DEVATICt2 BOCK AT SAS 1GS CIS23D 101 'JI M 'a)ll: PERICD & RESULiS ANNCfIATID BY 'nE UNIFOIN DIVISON,CN ATTACRENT (2). ESO 71E FOLIO 7ING DISCRIPENCIES hERE FCU!O BE%11b 71E 710 CO@ARISON DOCG E US:

1. 7EE ICLID;ING KIYCAIOS hERE FCUND TO BE LISTID ON h?l:AN, BUT NOT ON

'210: SICL'197Y IGTORT: 1054, 1092, 1136, 1138, 1257, 1295, 1297, & 1430. THESE R/C'S API ASSIGED 70 }UC PERSONNEL & ARE Ili1CTIVE AT 71E 7I11, (8' ',1% JtM'r DUE UO EXPIRID RDQUAL DATES. 2. IN ADDITION 7EE FOLIONING KEY CAIOS WEFI INACTIVE DUE '10 FAILURI 10 EUAL, muuCE II' ITER 4/8/E6 FIO1 W. MCEARTFY, ACCESS REQUIRDE7Is: 0546 PBGN, 0577 CCUSDC TO SEAICH, 0599 NO PHO70, 0717 MIDICAL, 1033 TIGN, 1068 IK-1, 3 43 2 NDICAL,& 1455 CONSEh? 'lO SFAFCH.

3. FIYCAFD 0923 }$D M.h? GMUP "D" ASSIGED ON SICURITI OPERATIO!%L REPORT. CHICK CF hD'R; DATA I!OICATID UASPR REUEST SENT 70 MR. LENT &T'S DFFICE ON 4-4-86, FOR ZONE CHANGE '10 GKUPING "B", NEVER RICEIVID BY NLC SIEURITI. IEE UASPR REQUEST CN 4-28-66, FOR ZCt;E GPCUPING "B" SEh? 70 IG.

LIN.RT'S CFFICE, RECEIVID BY SIC. DEPT OS 4-29-86. 4. KI'?CA'E'S OF6f, Ot72 & 1041 b12 CFRGD RESPFL'rIVI1Y 70 07E4,1262 E 19E7 - AFTER FAI RIPCRT FUN. K/C N70IFICATION CFA!ME SIEE75 SEE 70 kH'R; POR DATA EhTRY. >UDIT CCMPLETE 4/29/E6. SUE IDP:AFDS 8 w _fe,- y e. g - - - - p -m--etr--y--e------w - - - ~ - + - - --m- , - - --r s-a -g-m

M"JO2ELT ()) E(L'IQLS : h7FA!: =- SECURITY = + Kl.C lyW 75EE 1S23 1ADGELI, CnmiIA 7,10,11,14-31, 37 E6 E. VASEA17J7A, 'IUM'AIAE 7,10,11,14-31, 37 D27 EPICP, RICPAID 30 - ](G 'rAyIOF, CAPL 11 - 117 SPE:CE, SITM 32,33,35 4 178 ALDERSON, CAPL 34 + 029 ELIAS, PAPX 7,10,11,14-31, 37-40 + LEASE ADVISE; I

ATDCHICC (2) EQiBQS : hTMAN = - SICURITY = + E/.C NME N 1523

1. NAIGIJ, CnnHIA 7,10,11,14-31, 37 L868

2. VASF17AYTA, 'IWFAIAH 7,30,31,14-31, 37 2027

3. ERICH, RIQ'JJO 18 -

21 87

4. TAYIOR, CARL 11 -

L117

5. SPECE, SYDNEY 32,33,35 i Ll78

6. AIDERSCN, CAE 34 +

2029

7. ELIAS, FAFX 7,10,11,14-31, 37-40 +

PIEJEE ADVISE; ITD1 1: Unkncwn, No paperwerk on file showing cutborized 2cne change, onJy shown in AAL listing fran Apri3 4, 3906. ITD1 2: Unknown, Zones were added. ITai 3: Zone Deviaticn April 18, 1986; Zone added. ITD1 4: No prcble:n fourr3. l ITD'. 5: Zones deletes, apparently not deleted when badge originally was built. l ITai 6: Unkncwn, Zone was deleted. l ITD17: Unknown, Zones were deleted. l l l

y WE FOLI4WI?G IS A REPORT T FItOItG FRCM A AUDIT CCMPARIIG DE kWAN AAL DATA T 02/07/86 WIE DE SECURITY CPEPATIONAL REFORT CF 02/11/86. REFERDCE DOCUMENT (1), SHCkTNG A 'IDIAL T 24 ZONE DISCREPDCIES BETEEN THE DO CCMPAPlSCN DCCLMD.TS. THE ZONE DEVIATION BOCK AT SAS h76 ChTCKED FOR DiIS TIME PERICD & RESULTS ANNCfrATED BY DE UhTEOFMED DIVISON, ON ATTACHED DOCGENT (2). ALSO D E FOLLCWING Dutt.x12CES KIRE FCUND IN THE CCMPAPlSON & WE WO DCCGENTS: 1-DE FOIJDmG KEYCAFDS WERE LISTED Ct1 kWAN, BUT NCff ON DE SECURITY REPORT: 1050, 0917, 1054, 1083, 1092, 1116, 1138, 1257, 1295, 1297, 1362, & 1430 - THESE KEYCAPDS ARE ASSIGNED TO NIC PERSCNEL & ARE Ih7CTIVE AT TDS T ACDIT. 2-ONE KEYCAFD, 0975 IS LISTED ON hTNAN, BUT NOT ON THE SIEURITI REPORT DUE 'IO A IXD-38 VIOIATION RDOERItG DE K/C INTCTIVE. 3- %D KEYCAIDS, 0477 & 1575 LISTED ON hWR1, BUT NOT ON DE SICURI'IY REPORT ERE DE RESULT T THESE 20 PERSOh?EL BEING TERIDATID, WITH NCTTIFICATION BEING SETf 'IO THE kWAN INPUT PERSOh".EL ON DATE (2-11-86) FOUR DAYS IATER 'IEAN 'IEE CCMPARISON REEORT. VERIFICATICN COhTIRED ON TER" inTION IGTICE & DELETION J T INDIVIDUAL FRCM kWRI. 4-ONE KEYCAFD, 2054 INACTIVE BICAUSE THE DEIGE CHA!JGID VDCORS & GS ISSUED A hTei KIYCAIO. VERIFICATION T VDOOR CHANGE COhTIRED, AT TDE & AUDIT. 5-DE FOLIDiING THJ KEY CARDS hTRE FOUID ON DE SECURI'IY REPORT, BUT NOT ON DE hDIAN REPORT: AT TEE TDZ T THE AUDIT, VALID, SIGNED UASPR'S EXIST - ATTICHED TO AUDIT. K/C NOTIFICATIONS RE-SS.T TO hWRJ ItGUT PERSON!EL. 0789 - BRIDGES, JERPY 0854 - AR!DT, CHARLES 0938 - RAFAEL, ZAVALA SANDO/AL - 1351 - SIERFA, MAh1EL 1721 - DENNIS, FAY 1779 - MIITlUN, 'IOM 1819 - RC2 MAN, MIRON 1846 - HUICHINSCN, MAICIA GALL PERSON!EL HAVE BEH1 INPUT INIO hD'AN BY 2/24/86 IN ADDITION ON 2-25-86 REPORTS WERE RUN TF DE hTNAN SYSTIM IN DE FOLLOKING AREA'S: A. KEYCARD HOIDERS WI'IH BACKGRGRDS EQ, D, OR O. B. COhTACIORS hiiO HAVE %D Ih7CTIVE DP I/D hDBERS IN hWAN. C. WD!AN REPORT CF ACTIVE DTLCYES WHO HAVE A KEYCAFD BUT NO ASSIGMD.T. DESB RESULW I!OICATE (A), (B), & (C) HAVE NO DISCREPCCIES. DiIS CCMPLE'ITS TFIS AUDIT 2-25-86 SEE IDEFDS

z-DE FOLLOKING IS A REPORT T FI?DI1G FIO! A AUDIT CGPARING UIE kR' ANN AAL DA.TA T 3/17/86 WITH EE SICURITY CPEFATIONAL REPORT T 03/17/86. REEEEECE ATTACIM2C (1), SHCEllG A 'IOTAL T 15 '50NE DISCREPDCIES BE'IKEEN THE DO CmPARISCN DOCDENTS. 'IEE ZONE DEVIATICN BOCEAT SAS KAS CFJ EOR Tr2S TDE PERICD & RESULTS ANNCfTATED BY 'IHE UNIFORED DIVISON, ON ATTACHID DCCDEt7T (2). ALSO DE FOLIDGIG DmLwCES KERE FO.ilD IN DE CGPARISON T THE DO DOCDEN75:

1. DE FOLINItG KEYCAIDS KERE LISTED ON hDIAN, BUT NOT ON THE SECURI'IY REPORT:0917,1054,1092,1116,1138,1257,1295,1362 & 1430 - TIESE KEYCARDS ARE ASSIGNED TO NIC PERSONNEL AND ARE INT,CTIVE BECAUSE 'IEEY'RE TPAINING REQUALS ARE NCfT UP 'IO-DATE, AT DE THE & DiIS AUDIT.

2. D O KEYCARDS, 0449 & 2241 ARE NEK RIPUCE2EE CAFDS FOR 1568 & 2679 RESPu;nVELY. hD1AN KAS NCTTIFIED AT TDE T NDSERICAL CHA!EE, PAPER WPK RESI2E 'IO hDIAN FOR K/C CHANGE NOTIFICATION.

3. KEYCAFD 1004 INTCTIVE DUE TO PHOIIG MIDICAL REQUAL CCMPETION. i i l e

ATI7CPIEh? (1) SD97J: kWAN = = SECURITI = + ElC ?ME IQE 0459 HCDANIELS, KELLY 12 (+) 1083 CARSE, II, DALE 3 (+) 2521 9!ITH, PAMELA 36 (+) 1177 FLUKER, RCBERT JR. 37 (-) 1817 MCKART, JERRY 30,31 (-) 1937 AUBRY, JACK 30,31 (-) 1951 LCKRIE, FPANK , 7,10,11,14-31,37-40 37 (-) 2546 HEFEIFER, DEBOPAH 2577 h7TASZE, ROGER 30,31 (-) 2639 MEYERS, MICHEAL 30,31 (-) 2657 KARALEk7TZ, RCEERT 30,31 (-) i 2842 SIFCN, h7LLIAM 30,31 (-) 2889 LYtCH, IR7IN 7 (-) 2898 ZIELINSKI, FRANK 18,27 (-) 2948 PGELL, DALE 9,12,13 (-)

NOTE: THE (+) SYMBOL MEANS 'mE SECURITI REPORT HAS THESE ZONES LISTED BUT kW W; DOES LOT.

THE (-) SYMBOL FEANS THE kWR; REPORT HAS THESE ZONES LISTID, BUT THE SECURITI REPORT DOES !OT. THE FOLIDRI1O KEY CARDS ARE IN7CTIVE, PLEASE ADVISE: 0599 OHL, JOFDAN 48966 NO CURRE2TT PECIO 1117 FAHRNER, WILLIAM 16821 NO CLWT PHO70 1253 BENAGLIO, JAMES 44852 NO CURRENT PHO70 1412 OLSEN, PALPH i 36088 NO CURRE27T PHOTO

ATI702ET (2) .N: hTW.N = = SECUPlTl = + E/C N44E 20NE 0459 MCDANIELS, KELLY 12 (+) item 1 1083 CARSE, II, DALE 3 (+) item 2 2521 94ITH, PAMEIA 36 (+) item 3 1177 FLUKER, RTERT JR. 37 (-) its 4 1817 MCKART, JERW 30,31 (-) item 5 1937 AUBW, JACK 30,31 (-) itsa 6 1951 IGRIE, FFASK 37 (-) item 7 2546 HEFEIMER, DEBOPAH 7,10,11,14-31,37-40 item 8 2577 WITASZE, ROGER 30,31 (-) item 9 2639 MEYERS, MICHEAL 30,31 (-) its 10 2657 KAPAI.EKITZ, RGERT 30,31 (-) item 11 2842-SIhDN, WILLIAM 30,31 (-) it s 12 2889 LY1CH, IWIN 7 (-) item 13 2898 ZIELINSKI, FPANK 18,27 (-) its 14 2948 P GELL, DALE 9,12,13 (-) item 15 CNOTE: THE (+) SYMBOL MER S THE SECUPlTI REPORT EAS 'IEESE ZONES LISTID BW hWAN DOES NOT. TE (-) SYMBOL MEANS THE KTWS REPORT HAS THESE ZONES LISTED, BW THE SECURITY REPORT DOES 10T. Audit Findings Results: 21 MAR 86 Item 1lsItem3: zone deviations were entercS on 17 Mar 86. Item 2s cause unknown, zone was deleted. Items 5,5,7 & 13: cause unknown, zone was aSded. Item 8:& Item 15: no problem fourd this date (received zone change 18 Mar 86). Items {,9,10,11&12: zone changes were received and enterE3 on 12 Mar 86. Possibly the changes were not concurre3 with. ItemII: zonechangewasreceivedandhnteredon13 Mar 86.Possiblythe charge was not concurre3 with. 'IHIS CCMPLETES THIS AUDIT 3/21/66 SUE EDIG.RDS o e 9 { ^ $ -m, ,i- -.

THE FOLLOGIG IS A REPORT OF FIIDIIG FRCE A AUDIT CCt9ARI!G THE WFFA!; A.'d., DATA OF 1-20-86 WITH TdE SECURITY OPEPATION REFORT OF 1-21-86. REFERRCE ATIACHED DCCUMES (1),1-19-86 ACIUALLY l'ADE ON 1-23-86 SH3 GIG 117 ZONE DISCREPOCIES BEIWEC; 'IEE Tn0 DOCUMBES. THE ZONE DEVIATION BOOK AT SAS WAS CHECKED FOR THIS 1 TIME PERIOD & RESULTS A!UTATD BY THE UNIF0FFED DIVISON ON THE ATTACHD DOCUME R (2). TdE RC%I!CER OF THE DISCREPOCIES HAVE BEEN CONFIP?lD AS ADMINISTATIVE EPROR, AfD CORRECTIONS FADE. 131 UASPR'S HAVE BEC; RD23FSTED FOR 13 PERSO!;NEL FOR DELETION OR ADDITION OF CDPRECT ZO!ES. ALL DISCRPECIES HAVE BEEN 00RRECTED AS DOCUMBEED IN OPEPATO:aL R50RT EATED l-28-86. IN ADDITION ON 1-23-86, REIORTS WERE RUN OFF OF THE WFMAN SYSTD1 IN THE FOLLOc.7BE ARFA'S: A. KEYCARD HOLDERS WITd BACKGROJ!CS D2,D,OR O. B. CONTPACIORS h30 EAVE Tv0 IIGCTIVE HG ID NU3GERS IN la'AN. C. WF:%N REPORT CF ACTIVE DELOYES hBO HAVE A KEYCARD BiJT NO ASSIGmD7T. - TdE RESULTS OF THESE REPORTS, INDICATD ON (A) SIX PDJPLE WERE DEADFILED ERRO a]USLY, VERIFIED BY TdE SUPT OF EACFMJIO INVESTICs.TIONS. SOTd (B) & (C) HAVE !O DISCPIPDCIES. SUE DiGRDS 1/2S/86

i K/C NAME ZONES SYP3OLS: hTPAN = - SECURITY = + 1-19-86 0463 HAYTER,CRIAG 2,8 (+) 0587 CHUPURDY, DALE 4,5 (+) 0485 MIL 70N, JOYCE 9,12,13 (+) 0490 ROSSI,TERESA 9,12,13 (+) 0764 COLLINS, JASPER 3,4 (+) 0766 BORVATH,PAM ERET 2,3,4,5,7,8,10,11,14-40 (+) 0791 SURMACZ, THOMAS 7 (+) 0796 JANSSDG, RICHARD 4 (+) 0837 LOVELADY,THCPAS 2,4,8 (+) 0844 CYRULD? SKI, JIM 34 (+) 1032 BARTMAN, STEVEN 33 (+) 1041 PASON, MICHAEL 31 (+) 1083 TOMLINSON, m &RD 30,31 (+) 9 1124 MIITE,IARRY 5 (+) 1223 ROSE,RENEE 15-32,38,39 (+) 1327 h3 ER, BRYAN 2,4 (+) 1385 KNICELEY, JAMES 8 (+) 1546 GERHARUT, ROBERT 9,12,13 (+) 1573 BOBO,InGLD 9,12,13 (+) 1803 FUNK, JOHN 4 (+) 1997 TROUSDALE,HERSHEL 8 (+) 2213 BECK," ROBERT 33 (+) 2271 VANDERPOOL,SIEN 2,8 (+) 2316 LEATHERS,ROBEPT 33 (+) 2806 KREUCHAUI,KEhl"TH 33 (+) 2977 STANIFER,NIOKA 8 (+) ~ 2986 MELL,LISA 14 (+) p 0547 MERFERT,LAh~4D EE 8 (-) 0601 DOMDN, DON 3,5,34,36 (-) 0650 ROIDIDO,MAUREEN 6,10,11 (-) 0700 PETTY,APJOLD 3,4 (-) 0941 MITCHELL, DAVID 30 (-) 1057 SKLARCZYK, JOSEPH 2,3,4,5,8,34,36 (-) 1196 GUALDONI, DANIEL 5,34 (-) 1228 KAMPRATH, MARTHA 3,4,5,34 (-) 1254 SAHLI, JOSEPH 7,10,11,14-33,37-40 (-) 1467 EAUIERMANN, DAVID 14 ( ' 1577 maRD,STE7Di 9,12,13 (-) 1669 SOLL, RONALD 7 (-)

K/C N74E ZONES SYMBOLS: hTPAN = - SECURI'n' = + 1-19-86 0463 HAYTER,CRIAG 2,8 (+) 0587 CHUPURDY, DALE 4,5 (+) *DID ICT FAVE ZONE 5* 0485 MILTON, JOYCE 9,12,13 (+) 0490 ROSSI,TERESA 9,12,13 (+) 0764 COLLINS, JASPER 3,4 (+) *DID NOT HAVE ZONE 4* f .0766 HORVATH, MARGARET 2,3,4,5,7,8,10,11,14-40 (+) 0791 SURMACZ,THCMAS 7 (+) 0796 JANSSEtG, RICHARD 4 (+)

ZONE DEVIATIOWS JAWZONE 4 0837 LOVELADY, THOMAS 2,4,8 (+) *ZO!2 DEVIATIOW11 JAWZ2,4,8*

0844 CYRULEWSKI, JIM 34 (+) 1032 BARD'AN, STEVEN 33 (+) 1041 MASON, MICHAEL 31 (+) 1083 'IOMLINSON, EUGED 30,31 (+) *A.A.L. SHOWS 30 & 31* -T/M A'^5 b # ', s' 1124 hMITE,IARRY 5 (+) *WAS ZONE DEVIATIOW23 DEC/ ZONE 4* cl223 ROSE,RSIE 15-32,38,39 (+) 1327 WEBER,BIGAN 2,4 (+) 1385 1071CELEY, JAMES 8 (+) 1546 GERHARUP, ROBERT 9,12,13 (t) *?* 1573 BCBO, DONALD 9,12,13 (+) *?* 1803 FUNK,JCHN 4 (+) 1997 TROJSDALE,HERSHEL 8 (+) 2213 B EK, ROBERT 33 (+) 2271 VANDERPOOL,SIFDN 2,8 (+) 2316 LEATHERS, ROBERT 33 (+) 2806 KREUCHAUT,KENhTIE 33 (+) 2977 SIANIFER,NICKA 8 (+)

ZONE DEVIATIOW30 DE/ ZONE 8*

2986 MELL,LISA 14 (+) 0547 MERFERT,IAWRDCE 8 (-) 0601 DOtHDN, DON 3,5,34,36 (-) *?*Z DEVIATIOW20 DEC/Z 8* 0650 ROIONDO,MAUREW 6,10,11 (-) 0700 PETTY,ARELD 3,4 (-) *A.A.L. SHOWS NO ZONES 3 OR 4* SM b ' -"O ) 0941 MITCHELL, DAVID 30 (-) c1057 SKLAPCZYK, JOSEPH 2,3,4,5,8,34,36 (-) 1196 GUALDONI, DANIEL 5,34 (-) 1228 KAMPRATH,FNL'"HA 3,4,5,34 (-) *ALREADY FAD THE ZONES

1254 SAu.LI, JOSEPH 7,10,11,14-33,37-40 (-) *ALREADY FAD ZS*

1467 DAUIERMANN, DAVID 14 (-) 1577 EU GRD,STITIEN 9,12,13 (-) *?* 1669 SOLL,tC E 7 (-) 1

-1796 DEIDOF,JAES 7 (-) 1804 TURER, GARY 7 (-) 1818 BIAIR, ROBIN 2,4 (-) *?*ALRFADY FAD ZOES/18 JAN DEVI 1857 DOSSEAU,JAES 7 (-) 1875 hTAVER, JOHN 7 (-) 1902 HILL, JAMES 7 (-) 1935 SCHEICH,JEFFERY 7 (-) 1937 AUBREY, JACK 7 (-) .1943 CHAPPELL,UILLIAMS 30,31 (-) *ZOE DEVIATIOW17 JAWZOtE 30 1944 JOES,SONYA 2,8 (-)

ZONE DEVIATIOW13 JAWZOE 8*

1947 EUER, GEORGE 7 (-) 2025 PADOr, PAUL 7 (-) 2035 PEGCUSKIE,(DERGE 2,8 (-) *DEV./27 DEC/Z8:DW./5 JAWZ2* 2047 - RISDEN, DALE 2,8 (-)

FAD 8:DEV./24 DE/Z2*

2050 HENDERSON, MARK 7 (-) 2052 WELLS,VERN 30,31,34 (-) *DEV./2 JA W ZONE 30* 2085 SIANDRIDGE,BARPARA 6 (-) *HAD ZONE 8 DEV./20 DE* 2110 SORRELS, JUDY 7 (-) 2112 PAYPENT, GERALD 7 (-) 2116 RAKER, JACK 7 (-) 2125 h2GNER,TItDIEY 7 (-) 2141 IORGAN,JEFFER 2,8 (-) *DEV./17 JAWZONE 8* 2169 MCtAMAVAY,ZACHARY 7 (-) 2182 MILLER, JAMES 7 (-) 2195 FOLLEIT,DEBORAH 7 (-) 2202 LEACH, DAVID 2 (-) *DEV./5 JAWZONE 2* 2235 GILBERP,ELVA 3,5 (-) *DEV./4 JAWZONE 8* 2253 HARRISON, WILLIAM 7 (-) 2259 LAW, PERRY 8 (-) *DEV./10 JAWZOE 8* 2266 LEdIS, PATRICK 7 (-) l 2299 FAUPRICRf, MICHAEL 31 (-) 2307 BOVAIR,RICFARD 7 (-) 2326 HA!OER,MICHEAL 2 (-) *DEV./28 DEC/ZOE 2* 2342 PENDLETON, JOSEPH 2,8 (-) *DEVS./21 DEC-22:23 DE-Z8* 2358 HUPION, ROGER 2,8 (-)*DEVS./31 DEC-Z8:5 JAWZ2* 2370 KOLAKOWSKI,RODNEY 7 (-) 2385 BRITT, ALICE 2,8 (-) *DEVIATIOW25 DT/ ZONE 2* 2406 BURNS,JAES 7 (-) 2411 IA7INESS,JEFFERY 7 (-) 2418 MASON,JAES 7 (-) *ALREADY HAD THE ZONE

2434 KELIAR, THOMAS 2,3,4,5,8,34,36 (-) *?*

o2441 SKELDItE,DEBRA 3,4,5,34 (-) *?* 2471 DURFEY, JESSE 7 (-) *ALREADY FAD THE ZONE

2480 WEISS, JOE 3,4,5,8,34,36 (-)

2482 MYERS,KURr 7,30,31 (-) 2484 BURKHARD?, WILLIAM 7 (-) 2538 BELCHER,JO!ATHON 7 (-) 2555 MCrimE, STEVEN 2 (-) *DEVIATIOW8 JAWZONE 8* 2556 KEISTER, STEVEN 2,8 (-) *DEVS/27 DE "2:17 JAN-Z8* 2559 PETERS, RUSSELL 7 (-) 2571 LIFORD, SHIRLEY 8 (-) *DEVIATIOW20 JAWZONE 8*

L 2577 WITASZEK, ROGER 7 (-) -2604 LAZEITE, GARY 7 (-) 2635-PMSHALL,507IT 7 (-) 2639 MYERS,MICHEAL 7 (-) 2657 KAVALENIT7, ROBERT 7 (-) 2681 RALL, RANDY 4 (-) 2687 DRUIARD, MARK 7 (-) 2717 h76 KINS, JAMES 7 (-) 2726 MORRISON,GLENN 7 (-) 2772 HARBAUGH, DALE 30 (-) 2797 BROOKS, TERRY 2 (-) *AIREADY HAD THE ZONE

2842 SI!ON, WILLIAM 7 (-)

2877 PAYMENT, MICHAEL 7 (-) 2883 MILLHOUSE,RODNEY 7 (-) 2898 ZIELINSKI,FRA!E 7 (-) 2905 NCVICHOWSKI,JOEDI 7 (-) 2974 CAGLE, BILLY 7 (-)

NS/SPIP PROCEDURES 4/28 g (, "l17). l' DESCR lREVl APP DATElSIl18.1713.3ISLl TASK l __e ____w w____e__w_e l ,l_____; 12000. INS Org & Fesp 12 Tl 860425 lY l l ~ [LGl ~i d u d. ~ [' 12002 'lCorresp & Pecords 12 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ [TSl ~ l T,(, hg (gtL ~ ' 12003 In p Security Trng 13 1 860421 lN l 04 104 lJSl ~l 3 g#1 13 Tl 860421 IN l l ~ ITSl ~l ~ fll2007lCPNEquiptrent i 2008 IInternal Ccep Evac 13 l 860320 lN l l ~ lJSl ~l h SMil ~ Vehicle-Cancel IC l 851227 lN l 99 199 lXXl ~ l 13. 9 % h hqc j ll2009 lNS 10 Tl 860425 IN l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ ,'l2018 l Evidence Control 2019 IWeapons Safety 10 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ lPSl ~l ~ 12020 ISeal Control 11 Tl 860425 IN l l ~ lLGl ~l ~ l2023 l Procedure Main 11 1 850812 lN l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ 12024 l Lock & Key Cust 12 1 860124 lY l 08 108 l PSI ~l 12025 l Lock & Key Coord Il l 860115 lY l 08 108 1I41 ~l l2026 lKeycard Coord Instructil Tl 860110 lN l 11 111 ISTl ~l 12027 lKeycard Custcdian il l 841212 lN l 11 111 lTSl ~l 12028 lNS Centr Mmin 10 Tl 860425 IN l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ 12030 INS Cleaning-Cancel 10 Tl 860425 IN l 99 199 IXX! ~l 12031 l Dress Standards-CancellC l 851227 lN l 99 199 lXXl ~l i 12032 l Rad Material Ship 10 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ lTSI ~l Q ~ 12500 lCennunications 15 l 860226 lN l 03 103 lLGl ~l 12502 lPA Patrol 13 1860428 lY l 09 109 ITSI. ~l 12503 IFatal Force il Tl 860407 IN l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ 12504 ILEIN Machine Operationll Tl 860425 lN l l ~ l psi ~l ~ 12505 ITrespassing 11 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ II4l ~l ~ 12506 l Arrest & Detention 10 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ ISTl ~l ~ l25G7 lAlarm Fesponse 14 Tl 850717 lY l l ~ lTSl ~l ~ 12508 ISur Peq & Prcc 15 1 860424 lY I 14 113 lJSI -l 12509 l;CO PA or VA Barriers 12 l 860422 lY l 09 109 l PSI ~l 12511 lNSC 13 1 860423 lY l 05 105 lSTl ~l 12512 ISL 16 l 860428 lY l 05 105 ITSl ~l 12513 lFFL 15 l 860428 lY l 05 105 lJSl ~l 12514 lKhse B l2 1 860421 lY l 05 105 IPSI ~l 12515 17c0 10 l 840326 lY l 05 105 IIGl ~l 12516 lPSO 17 l 860424 lY l 05 105 ISTl ~l 12517 lPEO 10 l 840207 lY l 05 105 lTSI ~l 12518 IVEO 13 1 851129 lY l 05 105 lJSl ~l 12519 IVSO 14 l -860424 lY l 05 105 l PSI ~l 12520 l REM 15 1 860421 lY l 07 107 lLGl ~l 12521 IFermi Drive Gate 12 Tl 850717 lN i 05 105 lST) ~l 12522 l Fermi 1 Dr Gate-CancellC l 840901 lN l 99 199 IXXI ~l 12523 lOCA Patrol 11 1 860303 lN l 09 109 lJS1 ~l t 12524 lEHR Sury Post 10 1 840326 lY l 05 105 [ PSI ~l l2525 (CAS 16 l 860428 lY l 05 105 lLGl ~l 12526 lSAS l4 l 850131 lY l 05 105 lSTl -l 12540 lNCC Bonb Threat 10 Tl 860425 lN l l ~ lLGl ~l ~ 12550 IFuel Storage Pesp 12 1 840326 lY l l ~ lLGl ~l ~ l2551 l Cont Area Acc Instructl3 Tl 850319 lY l l - lST) ~l ~ 12552 INew Fuel Pec/Stor Audtll l 840308 lY l l ~ ITSl ~l ~ 12553 lNS Disp New Fuel CAA il l 861117 lY l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ 12554 ISL New Fuel Strg CAA 12 1 840308 lY l l ~ IPSl ~l ~ 12555 iMoniter's New Fuel CAAll Tl 850319 lY l l ~ lLG1 ~l ~ e lSP01 iPersonnel Screening 16 l 860318 IN I 10 110 ISTI ~l ISP02 lPerrennel Ident IC l 860304 IN I 10 110 !TSI ~l ISPC3 IScdging 14 i E60123 lN i 11 111 lJ51 ~l ISPO4 ISec Iccess Centrol 17 l 860211 IN l 11 111 lFS! ~l ISPOS ISec Feporting Fecuire 14 I 860124 lN I 16 l15 lLGl ~l ISP06 IVehicle Traff & Park 13 1 860210 IN I 13 112 IST) ~l ISP07 lSec During Cps merg 12 1 851104 lY l 18 116 l'Isl -i ISP08 IVisitor ;dmittance 14 i 851122 IN 1 11 ill lJSl ~l /dr / 4[ 9 ISP09 IDecrtc-Visitors & Vehl4 1 651122 !N l 11 111 IPSI ~l illEM9 lImmrt P7mk A Matl Cntl3

1. 550304 lY l 06 iC6 !LGi

~i / _ _j _ 0:2 1

NS/SPIP PROCEDURES 4/28 I REV l APP DATS l SI l18.1713.3 l SL l TASK l lin l* DESCR 5 ,1 __________ __4___4.______ __4__ : _4___e_4 lSPll l Rout /Unann Insp-Searchl3 'l 860123 IN l l ~ lSTl ~l ~ 'lSP12 l Peg Off-Site Assist Il l 850411 lY l 19 l17 lTSI ~l ISP13 ITours by Plant Persn 12 1 860204 lN l l ~ lJSl ~l ~ ISP14 ISec Equip Maintenance 12 l 851129 lN l 15 114 lPSl ~l ISP15 l Lock & Key Control 13 1 851122 lN l 08 108 lLGl ~l ISP16 lBonbs & Overt Threats 12 l 851104 lY l 01 101 lSTl ~l ISPl7 l TID Control l2 l 840828 lN l l - lTSI ~l ~ ' lSP30TINew Fuel Tenp Storage 12 l 851104 lY l l ~ lIGl ~l ~ 6

B...:. g - o4 a 1 s SAEEGLADS FORMATON \\ V) s FEB 11 1986 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Frank Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the reactive safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. J. R. Creed, T. J. Madeda, G. L. Pirtle, and J. R. Kniceley of this office on November 12 through December 27, 1985, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-33 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. F. Agosti and other members of your staff on November 21, December 13, and December 19, 1985, at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during d/P the inspection. Within the'se ' areas, the inspection consisted of a selective N examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be potential violations of NRC requirements. You will be notified by separate corres-pondence of our decision regarding enforcement actions based on the findings of this inspection. No written response is required until you are notified of the proposed enforcement action. The number and scope of potential violations represent a significant concern on our behalf about the senior management direction and support provided to the security program. These concerns were discussed during the onsite exit meeting conducted on December 13, 1985 and at an Enforcement Conference held in NRC Region III on January 17, 1986. Your senior plant staff's support, oversight, and involvement is necessary to resolve these concerns as early as practical. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 73.21(c)(2). This info.mation must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. h5 IICU s;chnreien@6--/ pge is Decontro /1 / E V[Q scuvess@$. GUARDS 'NFORMs10N

SAEGJADS FORVfl0V The Detroit Edison Company 2 FEB 11 1986 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, ad/ 1 ck A. Hind, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/85047(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosure: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DI/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ enclosure, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DCS/RSB (RIDS) Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section i Monroe County Office of l Civil Preparedness gnclosure centains

AFEGUARDS INFORMATI03 6ponseparationthis page is Decontrolled i

y r.- sn 1Ahl dniC.pi}nGbno'MgnP1A~IiVM GL O isi u Oin l / RIII RIII RIII I RIII BIII RIII JP II l . ( -r f ~ c3(3-gf( M (A /.. Ed )ifudftfL h&\\& Ajtt f, f(

/n/W 1 tie /jp Madeda Kngceley

' trig Stayleton A.w, s etn l }# l W !ra 4'

s j

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/85047(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-33 'afeguards Group IV S Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2200 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Inspection At: Plant Site and US NRC Region III Office Inspection Conducted: November 12-15; 19-20; December 9-13; and December 18-19, 1985 at site November 21 through December 6 and December 23-27, 1985 at NRC Region III Office Enforcement Conference Conducted: January 17, 198"i at NRC Region III Office Date of Previous Physical Security Inspection: September 30 through October 4, 1985 Type of Inspection: Reactive Physical Security Inspection [ b,4 2[7/N Inspectors: A T. J 'deda Da'te ' Phy c Security Inspector Le e/n/es ' %. L. Pirtle Date hysical Security Inspector 3 R. h 2h

J. R. Kniceley Date Physical. Security Inspector Reviewed By:

8!/#!86 . R. Creed, Chief Date Safeguards Section 1!/0 b /sporoved By: k[ T L. AxeIson, Cnief usta Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Enclosure contains SAFEGUAE5 INFC?mTICM Upen separatien this a f g,, o a m page is Cc:cntrolled v v us Mu' J W

Inspection Summary Inspection on November 12 through December 27, 1985 (Recort No. 50-341/85047(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: This team inspection was conducted to review the licensee's poor performance as indicated by several reportable events and adverse trends noted during the previous inspection and specifically included Management Effectiveness; Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Program Audit; Records and Reports; Testing and Maintenance; Compensatory Measures; Access Control - Personnel; Personnel Training and Qualification - General Requirements; Safeguards Contingency Plan Implementation; and Physical Protection of Safeguards Information. The inspection involved 248 inspection hours by three NRC inspectors and the Chief, Safeguards Section. Results: Fourteen potential violations and one licensee identified violation were noted during the inspection effort, to include: Compensatory Measures: Failure to implement required compensatory measures for a degraded vital area barrier (Section 10.b) Compensatory Measures: Accessing a Vital area door without implementing required compensatory measures (Section 10.a) Security Plan and Imolementing Procedures: Failure to have a security procedure required by the Security Plan (Section 5) Records and Reoorts: Failure to repor' two security events within time limits required by 10 CFR 73.71(c) (Section 8.b) Records and Reports: Documentation of some vital area barrier checks was not accurate on three separate dates (Section 8.a) Records and Reports: Some computerized record data required by the security plan could not be retrieved (Section 8.c) Testing and Maintenance: Failure to conduct some analyses of alarm systems as required by the security plan (Section 9.a) Testina and Maintenance: Preventive Maintenance did not meet procedural requirements in scope or effectiveness (Section 9.b) Testing and Maintenance: Corrective maintenance program often failed to meet time criteria identified in the security plan (Section 9.c) M ess Control . Personnel: Corrective actions to address personnel access control violations have not been effective (Section 11.a) Access Control - Personnel: Some security badges were not deleted from the access control system (Section 11.b) Access Control - Personnel: On one occasion, security badges were not adequately controlled at a badge issue point (Section 11.c) Ocarity : ceca Trainin and C; ali fic; f c - Tra trsinir; ar.d certific n ior, j qualirication time limits '.,ere exceecea for scme security force members (Section 12.a) Enclosure contains ( WEG'MDS INFCFMTICH Upcn separation this 2 F350 is Dacontrollod' i

s -Physical Protection for Safeguards Information: One document containing Safeguards Information was entered in a data processing system that did not meet security standards required by the licensee's procedures (Section 14) Access Control - Personnel: Several personnel were granted unescorted access to the site without all screening requirements being completed. This was identified and corrected by the licenses and no Notice of Violation was issued (Section 11.d) The licensee's immediate corrective actions were considered adequate to resolve the inspectors' initial concerns for each of these matters. The above potential violations were considered symptomatic of a lack of adequate unified direction for the security program (Section 6). Long term corrective actions will be reviewed after receipt of the licensee's written response to the inspection report. Additionally, an unresolved item pertaining to reporting certain security events will be sent to NRC, HQ for resolution (Section 4). Open items pertaining to implementation of the security compensatory measure program, the scope of Safeguards Contingency event drills / exercises and security force training were also noted (Sections 10.c, 12, and 13.a). (Details: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) 1 l j l t I l [ "f9._cjes"re egn31n; nUARD3 I,vcpyATIC.'i UP;n Separation this page 15 00contrc11ed l l 3 l l

/ iblLa c b 's N ' SA T ARDS N O N. M FEB 2 01986 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Wewport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the reactive physical security inspection conducted by Mr. G. L. Pirtle of this office on January 27-30, 1986, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-33 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. J. Piana and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during n the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No violations of NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. A discussion pertaining to a self-audit of a portion of your access control program was conducted during the inspection period. Our understanding of your proposed actions are described in Section 6 of the Report Details. Please advise us if our understanding of your actions is incorrect. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 73.21(c)(2). This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. A Enclosure contains f SRFEGUARCS INFCRMATICM Upon separation this N

e is 02 central 12d S '/%: h. _dl. b C& i G f

cj. m kuib). m birkeln 1 i e. n .7 liti Vi\\ UAi v

J SAFEGJARDS N 0RMA"ON The Detroit Edison Company 2 FEB 2 01986 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, W. L. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Ei. closure: Inspection Report No. 50-341/86004(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosure: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department TE File IE/DI/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ enclosure, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DCS/RSB (RIDS) Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness RIII SIII RIII. 'III Gb ("yJ f.d m Pirtle/rr Thd wri Axelson Enclosure centains

q/ gh,[t,

21.c/fW NM[@ 2[e SAFEGUAraS IiFCRMATICS U;cn segratica this p:;e is C;;;ntr:11 d qACE ?.,n, vN Lp!r.' p o.. Jr.4. i, U ; . i f u n p.1a,. ;O !9 ii

4 SA r-p h' n n n r a.r m m gM. 0,\\. f

.U.

IN)D lhfUni ~ ~ U.S.NUCLEARREGULATORYC0.91ISSIOS REGION III Report No. 50-341/86004(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-33 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2200 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: January 27-30, 1986 Date of Previous Physical Security Inspection: November 12 through December 27, 1985 Type of Inspection: Reactive Physical Security Inspection Inspector: 41hh 2 /2e/S6 G. L. Pirtle Date Physical Security Inspector Approved By: h 86 (f.R. Creed, Chief Date Safeguards Section Inspection Summary Inspection on January 27-30, 1986 (Recort No. 50-341/36004(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included Management Effectiveness - Security Program; Security Organization; Alarm Stations; and Access Control - Personnel. The inspection involved 31 inspector-hours by one NRC inspector. Results: No violations of NRC requirements were noted in the areas inspected. An unresolved item pertaining to a portion of a vital area barrier was noted and will be sent to NRC, HQ for resolution. Supervision and performance of the uniformed force appeared adequate. Morale of the GTOC security staff appears to warrant security management attention. The licensee committed to complete an audit of their zone deviation access control program by February 10, 1996. Progress was noted in correcting the adverse trends pertaining to excessive compensatory measures, access control personnel errors, and timely maintenance support for security equipment.

Finally, clarity and r2 solution for a clesed circuit television rcriter rec;uired improve: ant.

(Details: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) En:lesure cor, tai;s S??EGUA'1CS INFCRMATICh, Up:n separation this 4 F:.;3 is Cccentrolled y e@ 44 yg y y; Lp,..e ~ -- ~ _,Qt,rre. L.. -. v,,. -. - . m@;! m ,y .... L, w.., s I i 'v' r

g6 erymsF 1 Detroit Edison nc 042C Date: February 26, 1986 To: Charles Sexauer Nuclear Production Administrator From: Joseph H. Kort Nuclear Security Coordinator

Subject:

Revision 9 Physical Security Plan Please submit Revision 9 of the Physical Security Plan to OSRO for approval. Attached is a breakdown of the reviewers corcments that were all incorporated or resolved, and the comment control forms. JHK/ cal f /[ Approved by: r, _ OTRO Chairman / J J Jt / A M E II 1 a 2 - Z4 - (({o - 2 #2 6 ~$O &). g. d(byl0$ @Ne-ud WHEN SEPAPATED FRO?,! ENCLOSUP.ES. HANDLE IHl$ C:SJl. El,7 A3 gE,;g ;7;0 ZED $5fl03AliU3'$$3)iiiOS

a\\- e 4 SEGJARDS NFCEMATM p.AR 0 6 G86 Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Ediscn Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166

Dear Mr. Agosti:

This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter deted February 6, 1986, which transmitted changes, identified as Revision 8, to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan," under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p). ' Te'havt reviewed the submitted changes and have determined that, except for those items ider.tified in the enclosure, they are consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p) and do not decrease the effectiveness of the plan. These changes are, therefore, acceptable. For those items identified as being unacceptable under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p), the previously approved plan revisiors must be followed. Should you want to pursue changing the plan under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p), you must resubmit the changes modified to address our com: rents. In those instances where you desire to pursue the changes without modification, they must be resubmitted under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90. The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P. L. 95-511. The enclosures to your letter centain Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and are being withheld from public disclosure. The enclosure to this letter also contains Safeguards Information and should be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Sincerely, Original Signed by W. L. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Coments (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) c: w/o er. closure: See Attached List r, j,-.., e. 7.--. L. d: ~ SAFtudn.g,y a' y g o. ? ?,T, ! a ' a wo e. m... mm

3.

v Frank E. Agosti

? MAR 0 61986 'bec w/ enclosure, w/o attached list: NMSS/SGPR NRR/SSPB SG Case File: 05000034104WA SG Inspector File: Madeda SG Reviewer File NRR Docket File RII'$h RI}I RIII s RIII 'Qil l.LQ U h: ~h Kers/jl Creed Wr,ight Axeksen 2lp/86 ih!!-

[ (, n i SA iGUARDS N,' 0R V A" ON APR 0 31986 Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166

Dear Mr. Agosti:

This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated February 28, 1986, which transmitted changes, identified as Revision 9, to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan," under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p). We have reviewed the submitted changes and have determined that, except for those items identified in the enclosure, they are consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p) and do not decrease the effectiveness of the plan. These changes are, therefore, acceptable. For those items identified as being unacceptable under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p), the previously approved plan revisions must be followed. Should you want to pursue changing the plan under the provisions cf 10 CFR 50.54(p), you r.ust resubmit the changes modified to address our comments. In those instances where you desire to pursue the changes without modification, they must be resubmitted under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90. The changes accepted with this letter does not include those changes made in Revision 8 to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan" on which comments were forwarded to you by our letter of March 6, 1996. The comments on these changes must be resolved and the changes resubmitted under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p) or the changes resubmitted under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90. The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therfore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L. 95-511. i .The enclosure to your letter contains Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and are being withheld from public disclosure. SAFEGUARDS NFORMAT'Oh DETJnb Upon Sepcration Thr3 ?Q50 15 Decon:rclled 9ff. 0 [G orna-esom L wwmoa + a j

SAF~G A?as TORN A"04 Mr. Frank E. Agosti 2 APR 0 31986 The enclosure to this letter also contains Safeguards Information and should be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Sincerely, W. L. Axels hief 2 Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Comments (Unclassified SafeguardsInformation) cc w/o enclosure: See Attached List bec: w/ enclosure, w/o attached list: NMSS/SGRT NRR/SSPB SG Case File: 0500034105WA SG Inspector File: Madeda SG Reviewer File NRR Docket File i i s 4 .fi hel:

n Carz-i..-

n .,/ d . W., A SA75G;:sr2s !'::: :;7ic ; na \\ n inIII m. v s cpen 3;p3;.a:icn This / rig.g\\ Kers/jl Creec Axe p r' Pase is becontrolkd QM b G4/V/S6 SAFEGUARDS 'NFORMAT!0N--..

E FERMI Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Frank E. Agosti Vice President, Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 cc: Mr. Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Ronald C. Callen LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Adv. Planning Review Section 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Michigan Public Service Connission Washington, D. C. 20036 6545 Mercantile Way P. O. Box 30721 John Flynn, Esq. Lansing, Michigan 48909 Senior Attorney The Detroit Edison Ccepany Regional Administrator, Region III 2000 Second Avenue U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Detroit, Michigan 48226 799 Rocsevelt Road Glen Ellyr., Illinois 60137 Mr. Dennis R. Hahn, Chief Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of-Radiological Health P. O. Box 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Mr. O. Keener Earle Supervisor-Licensing The Detroit Edison Company Fermi Unit 2 6400 No. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 ~ f Mr. Paul Byron J U. S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission Resident Inspector's Office 6450 W. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness 7 963 South Raisinville Monrce, Michigan 48161 } } g - ~ -

o v t!att:r J. McCarthy, Jr. Cna.rman of th: Bea'd Detroit 2 Asen e Ecison =000Se:enw= u January 29, 1986 VI-86-0008 Mr. Jamec G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatbry Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois' 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

1) Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43 2) NRC to Detroit Edison Letter, " Requesting Inforestion Pursuant to 10CFR50.54(f)", Dec emb e r 24, 1985 3) Detroit Edison to NRC Letter, " Reactor Operations Improvement Plan". VP-85-0198, October 10, 1985

Subject:

Response to Request for Information Pursuant to 10CFR50.54(f) This letter is submitted in response to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's request for information pursuant to 10CFR50.54(f) which is cited as Reference 2 above. Detroit Edison is committed to the highest standards for both managing and operating the Fermi 2 facility. Enhancenent of management and management practices is essential to attain the operati.ng and performance goals set for Termi' 2. We understand what needs to be done to improve regulatory and operational performance and are prepared to take the actions necessary to effect such improvements. The fellowing three sections address the issues identified in Reference 2 above: t c\\ ww www-,y.

r 3 - ~ .o Mr. Jcaos G. Keppler January 29, 1986 1 VP-86-0008i Page 2 \\ 4 1. ADEQUACY OF MANAGEMENT, MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS Detroit Edison management needs to strengthen the se'nsitivity, discipline and responsiveness-of the Nuclear Operations organization. In this regard, Nuclear Operations management is developing a Nuclear Operations Improvement Plan ubich addresses planning, accountability, attitude, communications, teamwork, follow-up and training in the entire organization. By developing a plan directed toward eliminating deficiencies in these areas, improvements can be expected in overall management, in the ability to recognize and respond to problems which could affect plant safety and in controls to assure improved regulatory, operating, engineering, maintenance and security performance. A plan is being developed and will be reviewed in detail by an Overview Committee prior to implementation. The plan vill be initiated no later than May 1,,1986 and fully implemented by July 1, 1986. The role of the Overview Committee is more fully described belev. Mnrace-ent i Detroit Edison is evaluating the key management p e rs onn e l at Fermi 2 to assess performance and effectiveness. A m'anagement change will be made on February 1, 1986 to accommodate the retirement of Wayne Jens, Vic e-P r e s id en t, Nuclear Operations. Frank Agosti, Manager-Nuclear Operations will succeed Wayne Jens as Vice-President beginning on that date. Further, I recognize that additional strengthening of the Fermi 2 management is appropriate. Consequently, I am seeking additional officer candidates with nuclear operating experience from outside the Company to provide additional management which I feel is required to achieve the goal of operating excellence. These individuals will be charged with completing reviews of the existing Fermi 2 management and making such changes as deemed desireable. Mr. Agosti vill report directly to me until the above officers have been selected. I have directed the President and Chief Operating Officer of Detroit Edison, Charles M. Beidel, to assist me in eonitoring the perfer:arce of the Fucles: Operations organization. The 3uclear Quality Assurance organization will report to Mr. Heidel. The President will also assure that any other corporate resources are

Mr. Jcaes C. Reppler January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 3 provided which are necessary to sapport or audit the Nuclear Operations organization. This change in control will enhance the use of Quality Assurance as a management tool to improve regulatory and operating performance. In addition, three other Detroit Edison officers will provide independent overview of the Fermi 2 Engineering. Security and Administrative organizaticus. These three of fic ers will report to the P r e s *.d e n t in this matter. Further, to assist in this effort, we formed the Fermi 2 Independent Overview Committee which is comprised of recognized nuclear industry consultants. This committee will provide Detroit Edison management with a critique of the present Fermi 2 management. The Overview Committee has already conducted interviews with management personnel from both the site and corporate organizations. A preliminary report has been presented by the Overview Committee to a committee of the Board of Directors, the Board Nuclear Review Committee. Attachment I explains the role and schedule of the Overview Committee. Detroit Edison will strongly consider the Committee's recommendations for management improvement. Management Structure ~ The concept, structure and functions of the Nuclear Operations organization have been reviewed by independent management consultants and many of their recommendations are being implemented. In addition, the Company has been seeking other ways of improving and the folicwing are some examples. Nuclear Operations is currently working with a professional organization and management consultant from the Detroit Edison Corporate Office to improve the interface'between Nuclear Engineering a'nd Nuclear Production. Nuclear Engineering and Nuclear Production are conducting joint sessions to clarify resp onsibilities, agree on work priorities and to improve communications. In July, 1985, engineering for the Fermi plant was reorganized to consolidate engineering responsibilities in the Nuclear Operations organization under the leadership of an Assistant Manager. The present engineering c:3anization has assumed full control of engineering and is aug=ent2d by a single architect / engineer with a dedicated staff on site. S in c e engineering problems have occurred during this

>A Mr. Jonas C. Koppler January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 4 transition period, the effectiveness of the present engineering organization and its procedures are being reviewed by management. The architec t/ engineer vill review the procedures currently being used by the Nuclear Engineering organization to assure that proper control of the engineering process is maintained. The office of the Manager-Nuclear Operations was temporarily moved to the plant office building near the Plant Manager. The purpose of this move was to permit the Manager to mon # tor day-to-day work to insure that the Engineering organization, the Regulation and Compliance organization and Nuclear Operations Service organizations are being responsive to the needs of the plant. This effort has reinforced the operating authority of the Plant Manager and focused all nuclear operations resources toward support of Nuclear Produc tion. I intend to have Frank Agosti as Vic e-P r e s id en t continue to occupy that office for an interim period. The Fermi 2 Independent Overview Committee vill continue to examine the management structure and personnel to identify further i=provements which would enhance regulatory and operating performance. Each reconcendation vill be considered by management for implementation. Management Sveters and Practices After the succese of the Fall 85-01 Outage, it became evident that a similar planning and controls effort to plan, coordinate and follow-up is necessary not only for outage work but also for day-to-day work activities. Each organization vill be evaluated to assess the planning, coordination and completion of its activities. 'Where improvement needs are identified, these vill be included in the Nuclear Operations Improvement Plan. An evaluation of Nuclear Security was conducted to identify areas for improvement in regulatory performance. As a result. Nuclear Operations management and Euclear Security developed a Security Improvement f [/, Plan to address the inordinate number of security plan -q ' vioistions which occurred in the last cuarter of 1985. The asjor claments of the 3ecurity !:provement ?lan vere presented to the 3RC staff on January 17 and included

ag gr e s s iv e immediate actions, long-term corrective g

)

r Mr. Jacos' O. Kapplor Joccory 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 5 actions, time frames for accomplishnent and performance indicators. That Plan vill be discussed with the NRC in $f a separate meeting. The Security Improvement Plan vill incorporate recommendations from the Independent Overview Committee vbere appropriate. An evaluation of plant maintenance activities showed two areas for improvement which would enhance regulatory and operating performance. These two areas are post-maintenance test requirements and techniques for removing and placing into service critical plant equipment. The work order process has been modified to more clearly state the post-maintenance requirements and additional documentation requirements that must be met before the shift operating authority can accept a component or system for service. These improved management controls have resulted in better control over work and documentation for all maintenance activities. The procedures by which instrument repair technicians remove and place equipment back into service have undergone significant revision. In addition, instrument repair technicians have taken additional training and on-the-job instruction regarding the proper techniques to be used. These efforts vill reduce the chance of making errors and thereby reduce the impact maintenance activities might have on plant operations. The need for continuouc attention to management practices for impro'ved regulatory performance is recognized. The Detroit Edison ccrporate organization and management development consultant has been directed to work with Fermi 2 manatement to focus attention on their management practices within Nuclear Operations. As part of this effort, a survey on organizational climate and management practices has been conducted. The results of this survey vill provide data to guide both individual and group management practice improvements.' The sensitivity of the Company and Nuclear Operations, 1 specifically, to potentially significant conditions has b e en substantially heightened as a result of the p r ema t u r e criticality incident. Nuclear Operations management recognizes the need to communicate certain i events regardless of the reportability requirements. Recognizing that communication and response improvements between Detreit "dison and the 52C are as important as recognizing significant coeditions, a Fuclear Operations Direc tive has been prepared which prescribes policy

c Mr. Joaos C. Keppler January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 6 supporting a more effective dialogue between the two organizations. In addition, Detroit Edison has contracted with a consulting company to conduct a series of workshops with various management levels to improve their sensitivity to issues and responsiveness to the NRC. The consultants have already conducted interviews with site personnel as the first phase of developing the workshop. Subsequent phases of this workshop will involve the operating staff where reportability concerns and issues will be addressed to improve sensitivity. To enhance awareness of, and thereby sensitivity to, nuclear activities on the part of corporate management and the entire Nuclear Operations organization, a professional communications unit has been active on-site since August 1, 1985. This unit produces three publications which provide information to the site and corporate organizations. These publications include the monthly Moderator, the Weekiv Moderator and daily "Hanagement Update" messages distributed using the site computer communications system to generate a bulletin board nevaletter. In addition, banners and other posters have been displayed at the site entrance and ex it to remind all personnel of their key role in attaining the regulatory and operating performance goals set for Fermi 2. 2. READINESS FOR RE-START AND POWER ESCALATION Detroit Edison has concentrated on correcting errors that have been made in its operations and is committed to continue the Reactor Operations Improvement Plan. The Reactor Operations Improvement Plan was developed and implemented to improve operating performance of Fermi 2. That plan was directed at reducing the frequency of operational occurrences and technical specification violations. The positive trends which have been achieved since this program was implemented are expected to continue. The performance to date and indicators for the Reactor Operations Improvement Plan are shown in Attachment 2. Any startup decision will require verification that satisfactory trends are continuing. The Independent Overview Com=ittee will be reviewing resdiness of personnel and equipeent to support restart and sobsequent nodes of operation. The prc3:ess on, and resciution of, those syste= and equipnent problems which are i= pediments to startup, or for which the progress or

Mr. Jcass G. Koppler January 29, 1966 VP-86-0008 Page 7 resolution is expected to result in better operating and regulatory performance are presented in Attachment 3. The last startup at Fermi 2 on Oc tober 3, 1985 was successful and it is intended that similar steps and procedures be followed in preparation for the next atartup. The operators who will be responsible for reactor startup will have recently conducted reactor startup evolutions on the simulator. Attachment 4 describes the actions the plant staff will take to prepare the plant for startup. The actions that will occur after startup but prior to Test Condition 1 are covered in Attachment 5. The additional tects illustrate the retesting to verify perf ormance bef ore moving to the next Test Condition. The tests required at other power ascension conditions are delineated in the FSAR and the Startup Phase Test Program. The six Test Conditions have been established as hold p o in t s to assess overall plant performance. Before startup and before proceeding to any subsequent Test Condition, approvals will be required from plant management and Corporate management after receiving a review and recommendation from the Independent Overview Committee. Overall plant performance will be assessed utilizing the following: A. Reactor Operations Improvement Plan, to assess plant operationo; B. Startup Test Phase results, to assess plant equipment performance; C. Independent Overview Committee, to assess overall performance. The Overview Committee will make a recommendation to me and the Board Nuclear Review Committee regarding movement to the next Test Condition. My approval and review by the Board Nuclear Review Committee are required before :be pinnt can proceed. 3. IMPROVED REGULATORY AND OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCI The plans identified in this response rapresent Detroit Edison's cc=mitrent to improving the regulatory perfor=ance, operating performance and management

e e e e Mr. James C. Keppler January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 8 performance at Fermi 2. These plans will be monitored to assure that the improvements have been effective. Should it become evident that these plans need modification to effect further regulatory or operating performance improvements, such changes will be made. As an example, any development needs or weaknesses in the radiological controls area vill be addressed by the e Radiological Improvement Plan. Changes may immediately occur from the commitment to consider each recommendation received from the Independent Overview / Committee. Detroit Edison established a program called SAFETEAM in 1983. This program was a first for the commercial nuclear power industry in that it provided a method by which anyone who is currently working or had worked on the Fermi project could anonymously have any of their concerns about the plant or its operation investigated. This program has been directed by the Detroit Edison Auditor and operated by Detroit Edison personnel. The program has worked well. However, it is our plan to l p rovid e additional independence from the Company by transferring direction of the program to another company. A Detroit Edison Company subsidiary, SYNDECO, is currently operating similar programs at four other nuclear. power plant sites. It is our intent to contract with them to conduct this program at the Fermi site. It is understood that nuclear plants with high availab ili ty, small numbers of both forced outages and personnel errors, few unplanned scrams, few recurring events, and low personnel radiation exposures are generally well-managed overall. Such plants are more reliable and can be expected to have higher margins of safety. Detroit Edison is committed to such attributes for Termi 2 and has adopted certain Institute of Nuclear Power Operstjons (INPO) Performance Indicators as an aid in monitoring plant performance. Performance against these criteria has been tracked where applicable during the startup phase of operations. Additional indicators will be added to help identify areas needing corrective action as appropriate. The equipment problems and personnel errors have been indic a t iv e of Izzs-than-:eceptable perfern:nce. Ne a cin ov l e d g e that and ve regret it. Although these p rob l em s and erroro have not jeopardized the health and safety of the public, we nevertheless are co=citted to J ,-.n---. ,_,.-._,,----,-.--.-,-,,,.,..--.._-.---n

V Mr. Jacco C. Kopplor January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 9 correct the trends which could lead to safety concerns if left uncorrected. Detroit Edison believes that with the continued success of the Reactor Operations Imptovement Plan, the_imolementation of the Security Improvement Plan, and the actions taken as specified'in and Attachment 4 the plant will be ready to resume operation up to 5% power. Detroit Edison will meet with the NRC staff to discuss its overall performance and readiness to proceed above 5% power. It'is my intent to maintain oversight and review by the Independent Overview Committee, the Detroit Edison Board Nuclear Review Committee, and myself until we are satisfied that this plant with its new management, its plant operators, and its support staffs have demonstrated satisfactory performance as measured against other plants and INPO performance criteria. 3 Fermi 2 will only be operated in a manner which ensures the public health and safety. For this reason, Detroit Edison believes that the Fermi 2 license does not need to be suspended, revoked or otherwise modified. Very truly yours, Attachments cc: Mr. P. M. Byron Mr. M. David Lynch Mr. G. C. Wright USNRC Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555

Mr. James C. Keppler January 29, 1986 VP-86-0008 Page 10 DATH AND AFFIRMATION To the best of my knowledge and belief the statements contained herein are true and correct. In some respects these statements are not based on my personal knowledge but upon information furnished by other Detroit Edison employes. Such information has been reviewed in accordance with Company practice and I believe it to be reliable. . NL M, WalterJ.hjcart'hy, Jr. Chairman of the Board Detroit Edison SUBSCRIBED and SWOR to before me this ay of hMA 19 6 (/ f. MM Notary Public MARCIA DUCK Notary Public. Washtenaw Count /,!JI Fy Ccenmiulon DpIm Coc. A 'M AU u %, 9:a c

3 TABLE OF ATTAC1D0DITS Iitla Zaga 1-1 Fermi 2 Independent overview Committee i 2-1 l Reactor Operations Improve:nent Program Indicators 3-1 System & Equipment Problem Resolution or Progress 4-1 Actions to Insure Readiness for Reactor Restart 5-1 Actions to be Ccepleted Af ter Restart Prior to Test Condition 1 4

e: ATTACEMENT 1 Fermi 2 Indeoendent Overview Coerittee Recognizing that an introspective self-examination is by its very nature a limited undertaking, Detroit Edison has sought an independent, unbiased review of its management, organization and improvement programs. A group of recognized nuclear industry experts with a broad range of management and operating experience has been retained to operate as an Independent Overview Committee. This Overview Committee has an initial management assessment role and then a follow-up assessment and approval role for power ascension. The charter for this Overview i s provided herein. The committee has a specific charge from the Chief Executive Officer to report findings and make recommendations regarding the management of Fermi 2. i 4 6 4 1-1 J et--,e m a - ww- -. - - - - ~ - - -, -. - - - - - - - - - - - -. - n. ,e-

CHARTER FERMI 2 INDEPENDENT OVERVIEV CCWITTEE PURPOSE The purpose of the Committee is to provide corporate management and the Board of Directors of Detroit Edisen an overview evaluation of the operation of Fermi 2 an'd the performance of Nuclear Operations management. The Committee will provide advice concerning changes in management, management systems or structures and in the operaticn of Fermi 2 that will assure its safe operation. MZMBEPSFIP Jack Calhoun, General Physics Corporaticn, Chairman Harry J. Green, Consultant Leo C. Lessor, Management Analysis Co=pany Salomon Levy, S. Levy, Inc. Murray E. Miles, Basic Energy Technology Associates, Inc. Ja=es V. Neely, Nuclear Power Consultants, Inc. REPORTIFG The Coc=ittee will report its findings and recoc=endations to the Chief Executive Officer of Detroit Ed is on. The President of Detroit Edison will be available to participate in the deliberations of the committee when required. The Board Nuclear Review Committee will attend some of the meetings of the committee and will remain cognizant of itt findings and recommendations. pgLtJnIWATION OF THE CCvv1TTEE'S ACTIVITIES The Assistant Manager, Regulation & Cocpliance, Nuclear Operations, Detroit Edison, or his designee, will coordinate and assist where necessary in the activities of the Committee. He will provide any reports, memoranda, and letters the Committee requires and will arrange for meetings, interviews, visits to the plant, trips, etc., required by the Committee. He will act as contract administrator for all contracts required to carry out the Committee's activities. ANTICIPATED MEETING SCHEDULE Ucek of January 6 - Il Week of January 27 - 31 Veek of February 24 - 28 Cnc day er =crth fer :he rs=:inder et 1935 1-2

CRARTER Fermi 2 Independent overview Cc==ittee Page 2 SCOPE Manneneent Evaluation Task Frepare a report which identifies, evaluates, and analyzes any management, management structure, and system problems and root causes of these problems. This report should specifically address Item 1, Page 2, of the December 24, 1985, Nuclear Regulatory Commission letter from James C. Keppler to Wayne H. Jens. Present the Overview Committee report to Detroit Edison senior management, and representatives of the Detrcit Edison Board of Directors in a meeting to ba held on February 7,1986, or soon thereafter. Review the Improvecent Plan prepared by the Nuclear Operations management staff in response to the problems identified by the Overview Coc=ittee. Monitor during 1986 the actions required in meeting the Nuclear Operations Impreve=ent Plan and rece==end modifications to the plan as appropriate. Reseter Oneratfees Reviet Review the Reactor Operations Improvement Plan presented to the NRC in letters dated October 10, 1985, and November 27, 1985, and any future modificaticos to this plan. Address specifically our plans to restart the plant in February. Review the performance of the plant and organization during the restart of the plant af ter the Fall and Winter 1985 outage. Based on this review, recommend further action required for increasing reactor power beyond 5% to the next power plateau. The committee will review and comment on Detroit Edison's responte to the December 24, 1985, letter. Specifically, the committee should evaluate whether the plans presented in this letter adequately cover the necessary conditions that should be met prior to resuming operatloc. Since' the management evaluation task may have uncovered management deficiencies that should be corrected prior to restart, we would like to have those pointed out to us in your response and comments to our draf t letter. The ce=mittee will review and provide any necessary advice concerning each test condition up to and including cemnercial operation, warranty test, and full power operation. This power escalation program will be sub:!:!sd to the N3C in respeese to tha De:::Ser 24, 19?5, lettar. 1-3

ATTACHNENT 2 Reme t er Oeerations Imereverent Plan S t a.tps The Reactor Operations Improvement Plan was submitted to the NRC on October 18, 1985. Included herein is a status report on the committents contained in that letter. Sixty-one of the sixty-four cocmitments have been implecented. Monitoring information is also provided herein to demonstrate the effect the Plan has had on plant operations. The goals identified in this plan are ones which are indicative of a mature operating plant. Management expects positive trends to continue and will continue to monitor them. Any deviations away from the desired trend or goal vill prompt management review and corrective action, as appropriate, to assure that progress toward the objectives of the Plan continues. It is anticipated that as the Perni 2 operating experience increases, we will move even closer to these goals. It is important to note that these goals may require adjusteent, either up or down, shculd management determine that the goals are too limiting or are otherwise not achieving the desired results. Progress on the Plan will be reviewed with the Independent Over Committee. e a 2-1

c REACTOR OPERATIONS IMPROVEMENT PLAN Commitment Status Action T r ee

Statur

1. Current dated LCCs are displayed in hard copy.

Complete

2. The DDT system of flagging control board system and Incomplete component abnormal conditions is being made more (QSF issued) visible and meaningful in correlation with the outstanding work orders.

3. a. Tagging and work orders are being modified to Complete

- more clearly specify post-maintenance test re-quirements. b. Indicate which documents require revision. Complete

4. As a long-term action, administrative work procedures Partially Comp.

will be simplified or clarified to consistency. (Training Req'd.)

5. Item 5 Deleted.

N/A ~~

6. Nuclear Operations personnel have been advised to Complete consider the ccusequences of taking even the s im'pl e s t actions.

7. Personnel have been advised that it is equally Complete important that the error be connunicated so that appropriate operating staff or management actica can take place in a timely manner.

8. The reduction of open. work items and increased Complete control by the operating staff over open work items will reduce the number of unexpected operational occurrences and violations.

9. The Nuclear Training organization is developing Cocplete and, when possible, modifying existing scenarios I

to exercise the requalification classes on routine plant startup and operation.

10. Emphasis is being placed on normal system line-up, Complete operation and responses required.

11. The bmportance of logging activities on charts at Complete shift turnover, system startup end transient initiation is stressed as is evaluation of plant conditions using the Sequence of Events Recorder.

t

ROTE: All " Completes" have been verified by Nulcear Quality Assurance 2-2 4

,_,,__..,.-__.m _.--..,,.m-- ,,--r,, _.-.,%_,--,y.___

12. Tha Plcat M:n:ger cr th3 Sup3riste:d:nt-Cp:rstiens Completa cro cacti g i:dividually with c ch NSS, NASS cod Shift Op3rcting Advissr (SOA).

13. To improve the quality of Control Room operations Complete

' logs, entries into the Nuclear Supervising Operator's (NS0) log are being made by the NASS as an interim measure.

14. The Operations Engineer or designee is reviewing Complete the RSS and NSO logs at least daily, except week-ends, to assure that they are being kept properly and that the proper entries are being recorded as the plant is being operated.

15. Superintendent-Operations is reviewing the NSS and Complete NSO logs on a periodic basis to provide feedback to the NSS and the Operations Engineer.

16. The NASS has been assigned to the Control Roo:

Complete proper as a permanent duty station on shift.

17. The NASS be. keen placed in charge at the controls Complete area of the Control Rooe during planned reactivity manipulations, plant startups and shutdovus, multiple plant testing activities and outage periods when sign-ificant caintenance is in progress.

18. The role of the Control Room NSO has been clarified Complete to assist the NASS or NSS in directing plant act-ivities.

19. 7te duty station of the SOA is now the Contrcl Roce.

Complete

20. SOAs have increased their involvement in activities Complete in the Control Room.

21. Shift Technical Advisor (STA) monitors for hardware-Complete related problees associated with Control Room equip-ment which may not otherwise be identified or tracked.

22. The STA is concerned with resolving Control Roce Complete problems like nuisance annunciators and alarms in addition to normal duties.

23. The Reactor Ebgineer has increased participation in Complete reactor operations and is closely following, analyzing and reviewing significant reactor evolutions.

24. Operations Engineer has increased involvement in Complete operationo by following and reviewing performance of shift activities against established plans and chec} ing the quality of Control Rocc logs.

25. T.e MSS ha: been 3 vat the authcrity to cen:rel verk C c =; *. c t e i

in the plant by setting priorities and verk Ic:d. 2-3

m

26. Item 25 is cecomplished through interfcco with the plcnt Comp 1sto Outrga H:n:gc'r.nt crg 2izatito cnd thrtugh dircet i"v 1vc= nt in vsrk plcnning c: stings.

27. The Superintendent-operations periodically and without Complete notice has been observing shif t operation cetivities.

28. The Superintendent-Operations gives feedback to the Complete Nuclear Shif t Supervisor (RSS) or Nuclear Assistant Shift Supervisor (NASS) and documents any observations.

29. The Superintendent-Operations observations include Complete actual plant operations and the review of operations administrative activities such as shift turnover, los review and plant status system updates.

30. The advisor to the Plant Manager is conducting more Complete frequent, regular surveillances of Control Room operations.

31. The advisor observes the perf ormance of the Control Complete Room c rew, reads the log kept by the Shif t Operating Advisor (SOA), discusses any problems with the SOA reads the log kept by the Nuclear Supervising Operator (NS0).

32. In addition, the advisor observes plant paraceters Complete and provides his observations to the Plant Manager.

33. Following turnover from the of f going NSS, the NSS Complete conducts a briefing of shif t operating personnel.

34. Supplemental training on the current requirements for Complete control rod manipulations, including the reduced notch worth pull concept, has been conducted with all six shif ts of plant operators.

35. Training is emphasizing the important dif ferences Complete between the plant and the simulator during training.

36. The operations staff is providing on-shift training Complete regarding significant plant and procedure changes.

37. An interim status chart has been implemented to Complete track LCOs on, equipment required by Technical Specifications which af f ect shif t activities.

38. The work order, tagging and equipment status system Complete has been modified to more clearly specify post-maintenance test requirements.

39. Uuzan factors methods are being applied to the Partially administrative procedures to make thc= more Complete.

streamlined and more user oriented. (Training Reg'd) 2-4

40. LERs cro b0irgt

c. Trccksd.

Complete b. Trended so that symptoms of potential problems Complete can be diagnosed early to prevent recurrence.

41. Emerging trends and selected LERs are being evaluated Complete utilizing proven, systematic problem-solving methods to identify causes and remedial as well as preventive corrective action.

42. Corrective action taken is being:

a. Tracked to Completion. Complete b. evaluated for effectiveness. Complete

43. The corrective action process is being further enhanced by: -

Refinement of procedures associated with the Complete a. proc es s. b. Structured training foi personnel involved in the Cemplete evaluation and review phases of the process.

44. Corrective Action Procedures have been issued for Complete implementation.

45. Corrective Action formal training for selected Complete 4

personnel is scheduled to begin the week of November 4th.

46. Actions previously initiated by QA organization, will Complete improve the timeliness and overall effectiveness of the corrective action' process.

47. a. In each one-on-one session between the Plant Complete Manager or the Superintendent-Operations and the NSS, NASS, and SOA, employes are reminded of their responsibilities; delegated authority and account-abilities; of their expected job performances and of their relationship with other shif t members.

b. Meetings with employes down to the group super-Complete l visor level were held during the week of September 17 to discuss the status of the plant, the status of NRC/ DECO interactions and to remind each employe ] of his part in improving the performance of Fermi 2. )

48. The NSS is responsible for ensuring that the ability Co=plete

] to provide proper directicn is not ccupromised by an j excess of verk or testing. 2-5 i

49. F r this reason (Item 48), th2 BSS is cratrolli g eark is the Completo plcat by determinieg pricrity ced enou2ts cf cerk for th2 shift.

50. Work in the plant is identified and scheduled on a Cceplete Plan of the Day.

51. Each working day, a planning meeting is held with the Complete day shift NSS in attendance.

52. The NSS provides input relative to anticipated plant Complete operations over the next few days so that tasks can be identified and prioritized on the schedule accordingly.

53. The RSS establishes work priority and provides Complete direction as to the amount of work to be scheduled.

54. The Plant Support Engineers review Engineering Complete Evaluation Requests (EERa) and Engineering Design Packages (EDPs) to reduce plant changes to only those necessary for safe plant operation.

55. The RSS conducts statur meetings at 0600, 1800, and Complete 0100 hours.

56. These meetings (Item 55) are held with representatives frem complete the various work groups to monitor progress on l

important items as well as to allow additiers to the work schedule or review changes in ecurse as directed by the NSS.

57. Coals have been established for certain key Complete operational activities.

58. Detroit Edison has established objective monitoring Complete criteria to determine the overall effectiveness of the Reactor Operations Improvement Plan.

59. Detroit Edison organizational units have been Complete assigned responsibility to track and trend perform-ance with respect to each of these criteria.

60. Management will be monitoring this performance so Complete that adjustments can be made, if necessary.

61. The Nuclear Quality Assurance organisation of Nuclear Complete Operations will provide independent verification of effective implementation of the program utilizing audits and/or curveillance methods.

62. Results will be reported to Nuclear Production and Ce:plete Nuclear Operations Management.

-6 .. ~_

Remeter Onerariens frerevnsent Preers-Indienents coal Ar The goal is to minimize the number of open work orders. o o The dotted line represents the expected while the solid line represents the actual results. o As of January 26, 1986 there were 173 open work orders. Coal Er The goal is to minimize the number of field complete (F.C.) o EDP's open for greater than 30 days not yet closed and signed off by the Plant Manager. o As of January 26, 1986 there were 41 open F.C. EDP's. Coal cr The gosi is to minimize the number of outstanding Control o Room problec annunciators. The dotted line represents the expected range. The solid o line represents the actual results. A specific breakdown between engineering and broke /fix annunciators is also presented. o As of January 26, 1986 there vere a total of 39 outstanding Control Room probles annunciators. Coal Dr The goal is to perform all surveillance procedures on time, o including the grace period and to minimize the number requiring use of the grace period. o For the week ending January 26,1986 there were 100 1urveillances completed on time including the grace period and there was one (1) surveillance not completed within 24 hours of entering the grace period. Coal Er The goal is to minimise the number of outstanding, o time-sensitive LCO's. o As of January 26, 1986 there were zero (0) outstanding, time-sensitive LCO's. Coal Fr The goal is to minimize the nunber of Reportsbie operational o occurrences. o For the week ending January 26, 1986 there were zero (0) LER's. Tie fcur vaek rollic; avers;a as et January 16.1?)5 v:s o 0.25. 2-7

g l l G0AL A: Minkite cu-ber of eeen PN-21's (Verk Orders) 150 Management Attention Level Ohjectives: TOTAL 110 Expected TOTAL N l i u i M 400 l a i E l R l 1 o 300 i P l E l N I 219 W 200 l\\ O l 171 173 R I%15g6 - - - - / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 0 MAL K i 144 145 I 121117 O 100 1------- 110 R l Expected .D l E I R l s o l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 l December l ' January February l March l 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16232 9 16 23 30 6 l l NOTE: Includes plant system related FN-21's (work orders) only. During an Outage greater than one week in duration, total numbers can be ine,ressed by a factor of 2.5. Because the trend is above the Management Attention Level, an inquiry was prompted to identify the source for the increasing trend. The trend is above the Management Attention Level due to a controlled, deliberate increase in known work items to support reactor restart. 2-9 I

CCAL 3: Mialaise tumbcr sf EP's thich remain spes after cerk has been cempleted. I.e.. field cerelete, objectiva: DP's open 30 days - 15 Management Attention Level after field work 7 Expected complete 1 290 I l 100 l !!ueer I of 160 l Fiold l (onnlote 140 l CDP's l 120 l i 100 l coon i Pact 80 l 30 I Days 60 l I 4 0 j., -39 41 "34%3[- D5'42 20 l 1------------------------------------------------------ 15 !!r7, 10 1;___________;____________________________________. ____ 7 0 l

xuac 25 I

I I I I I I I _I I _I 1 1 I I I I Decorder I .Tanuary Februr.ty !!ar ch l 1 R 15 22 29 5 J2 19 26 ?. 9 15 23 2 9 16 23 30 G 4 i IIOTE: This trend remains above the Management Attention Level. A management inquiry has revealed that the rate of closure has remained relatively constant due to the large number of EQ EPs closed out durit;g the 85-01 Outage. 2-9

GOAL C:

M121 ico c:ab0r cf 12cperable cr er tin ously clarsi:3 annunciatora in Control Rom objective 15 Manage =ent Attention Level 10 Expected 100 l I i DxJ neering Fixes = 23 I Other Fixes = 16 9C I 'Ibtal = 39 I I 80 l l 'Ibtal Number of Annunciators = 1224 I 70 l l Sutstanding l 60 l Ccntrol l I Roon 50 51 I Probica

l 46 s'

40 l fl \\ 4 Annunciato:c 39 3 l 3V 3 8 -3 ", Raquirina 30 l l angineering i 23 y* 20 l 1 P1:: l_________________'___l!!.__15 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 5 r,n I in l_________________________________..____________________ 10 l ,:n 2 0 : 2.1 l 0 l 1 l _l 1 J l I I ,_f I l l l l l .I I I Deceribor .Tanua y Februt:P l "a r c!; i 1 G 15 22 29 5 12 19~2G 2 P 1G 23 1 6 16 23 30 f NOTE: Froblem annunciators are all inoperable, nuisance, setpoint, logic, etc. related annunciators. Management has requested a schedule and plan for the engineering items. Additional attention is being directed to expedite resolution of the other fixes required. 2-10

C0AL Da Perf orm Rurveillances en time miniririne unino ermee eerled ob j ec t ive : Surveillances completed on time including grace period 99% Management Attention Level - 100% Expected Surveillances not completed within 24 hours of eaching the grace period: 7/veek Management Attention Lesel 5/veek Expected l 101 1 1. g Survoillances l 100 F100-100-100-100-100-100 Completed l 99 1 cn Time 1 98 I Including l 97 l Grcce Period l 96 l (t) l 95 l l l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l December l January l February l March 1 1 E 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 l 10 l Survoillances.l Not 8 i Completed l------------------------------------------------------ 7 MAL Within 6 l 24 Hours l------------------------------------------------------ 5 of Gntering 4 l Expected the Grace l Porlod 2 I 2 (N3./ Week) 1f g -1 2g -1 1 1 \\ 0 1 I I I I I l 0 l I i 1 I I I I I I I December l January l February l March l 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 I 2-11

G0AL Et Minleire the neeber of outs t andine. tie, sensitive Leo's Obleetive: Number of dated - 5 Managen:ent Attention Level LCO's outstanding - 3 Expected 1 10 l 1 9 I I Number 8l l of 7l l Dated 6l 1 5 l------------------------------------------------------ 5 MAL LCO's l 4I I Outstanding 3 l------------------------------------------------------ 3 l Expected 21 2 111\\ ! -1 1 l 0 0-0 0-0 l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l December i January l February i March l 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 1623306 1 2-12

. Minielre the etmber of regortable operational occurrenc es COAL F: Ob4ective: Nucher of Licensee - 2/ week Managecent Attention Level Event Reports (LER's) 1.5/ week Expected i 5 I I I I 4 I I I Sumb3r l 3 l 1 I 2 - Mgmt. Of I Attention Level l I

- ------------------------------------------- 1.5 4ER's/wk l

Expected 1 i 1 1 I I O l 0 0-0-0 l I I I I i 1 I I I l l I l l l 1 I I l December l January l February 1 March l 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 3 i Fcur l I wack 2 I I tr 1. q - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. 5 - Mg.t. Jolling 1.25 1.25-1.25 Attention Level 1l------------\\-------------------------------------------------1.0-----Expected I

75 %.5>75,\\5725 Svorcge l

0 1 1 1 I l 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I bER's/wk) l December l January l February i March l 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 1623306 NOTE: Reportable Operational Occurrences do not include Security-related events. 2-13

ATTACHMENT 3 c /. Svatee and Ecui 'rne Proble Pegelution erPrQrees ~ The information berein identifies the status of system and equipment problems which were identified a:Nestraints to restart or which were addressed to improve regulatory and operating performance: ++ //... 1. Equipment Environment;ti Qualification' hodifica tioha 2. Installation of an Alternate Shutdown Panel e 3. Main Steat: Bypass Line Replacecent 4. South Reactor Peed Pump Turbine 5. High Pressure Coolant.. Injection'~(hPCI) Pump 6. Emergency Diesel Generator Repairs 7. Residual Heat Rc= oval Pump ",B" Hotor Repiscement, 8. Reactor Auxiliary Building Embedded Y1 des 9. Traversing In-Core Probe (TIP) Nitrogen Purge Line Isolation ,s 10. Reac tor Water Clean-Up Systic,Modificati~ ens ' ',' 9 9 M e 3 -1

1. Eeulement Environment al Dum11flemt ion Mndi f ient inna la crdsr to comply with the requiremsnts of 10CTR49 and Generic Letter 85-15, an evaluation was made of all safety-related equipment to determine its environmental qualificatico (EQ). The Fermi 2 EQ submittal to the NRC identified which safety-related equipment in a harsh crvironment would require relocation or replacement. During the Fall 85-01 Outage, all equipment delineated in the submittal was relocated or replaced. 2. Installation of Alt errat e Shutd evn Panel During the 85-01 outage an alternate shutdown panel was installed to provide additional shutdown capability to satisfy License Condition 2.c.9.d. in the event of a damaging fire in the Control Center. A final design and operating procedure review was conducted in parallel with construction. Three design deficiencies were identified and are being corrected. 3. Mnin Steer Evnens Lin e Reel me erent On September 15, 1985 cracks in the pipe vall of the east main steam bypass line were discovered. Si=ilar cracks were found in the west bypass line upon further investigation. The cracks developed at attachment points as a result of high frequency, flow-induced vib ra t ion. New bypass lines have been installed which incorporate beavier wall pipe to reduce stress, reduce pipe attachment stress concentration and pressure breakdown orifices to stage the pressure and reduce velocity in the pipe. Vibration and strain instrumentation has been installed on the lines to provide empirical design verification after the lines are in operatione A safety evaluation has been completed to ensure the system capacity meets the values stated in the Fermi 2 FSAR. 4. South Reactor Feed Pure Turb in e (SRFPT) The SRFPT failed in June,1985. The vibration on the machine was not detected in the Control Room due to inaccurate instrument indication. The extent of the damage required the complete disassembly and repair or replacement of the turbine rotor, bearing pedestal, and misec11anecus bearings, reals and tric piping. Additional instru=entation has been added sud the turbine is ready fo: cpsratier when reactor stes: is sva il ab le. A piping ccdificatica vas c:de en the gland seal system to reduce air in leakage to the cendenser. 3-2

I l 5. High Pressure coolant inteetion (upci) pump Icitici cperction cf th: High Prcssure Coolant Injection (HPCI) Pucp, under load, evidenced rederete vib ra t ion. During the Fall 85-01 Outage, cold alignment checks and realignment was made on the pump. No defects were found upon inspection of the booster pump internals. Modifications to the governor and overspeed trip device were made to ensure proper operation in the future. Installation of alignment devices for bot alignment of the unit were completed. The unit is ready for testing vben steam is available upon restart. 6. Emergerev Dienc! Cererator Rereira The diesels have undergone extensive analysis to determine the cause for the bearing problems experienced to date. Contributing causes include misalignment, Icog-term storage environment, misassembly, lack of pre-lube, and particulate in the oil. Several corrective actions have been taken to address the contributing causes. In addition, a slow-start feature has been added. A reliability demonstration is planned for two diesels. A presentation was made to the NRC staff on January 24, 1986, outlining this progrs=. A formal submittal of the program vill be rade to the NRC. 7. Re=iduel Eent Rencval Purr 'B' Motor Rerl a c e-an t Cu November 25. 1985, RHR pump motor "B" failed during operation in the shutdown cooling mode. Investigation shows the failure to be caused by lack of process control during manufacture fo11 cued by low-amplitude, cyclic stress during operation. A replac ement motor has been obtained fren' the Browns Ferry plant and is now installed. Another motor is being investigated to i eseure that this v;s an isolated failure. 8. Ranc tor ' Auxili mrv Building Erhedd ed Pla t e= Standard c= bedded plates were incorporaced in the design of the Reactor Building as a cecus to anchor loads to the concrete structure. Generic load capacities were established for these embedments with the intention of performing specific Icad reconciliation af ter construction completion to ensure no overloading. 3-3

5 A cesservctiva esslysis b d bse2 parform:d to identify '~ thsse embedaants which pstcutiolly cculd be overloaded. Bovever, subsequent detailed review of the potentially overloaded embed =ents. 9. Traversing In-Core Probe (TIP) Nitrogen Purge Line Isolatien Recent correspondence from the NRC reveals the TIP nitrogen purge line should conform to General Design criteria 56 (CDc56). An interim design to meet the intent of GDC56 is being implemented which incorporates two QAI seismically-nounted ball valves outside containment. This change will be installed prior to starting from the present outage. 10. Reneter Vat er Clennuo Sys t er Modific ations Juring initial operations, numerous unnecessary Reactor Water Cleanup System (RWCU) isolations oc curred. These isolations have been attributed primarily to the Steam Leak Detection System and to the differential flev (Leak Detection) isolation signale. Instrument and control modifications were made on this system to prevent recurrence of the problem and to provide 'he operators Control Room information. 3 -4 a

\\ ATTACRMENT 4 Actions to Insure Readines s for Resetor Rentart Following are the ite=s which were completed for the last reac:or startup prior to the fal'. 85-01 Outage. Because this startup was successful, these items will be repeated for the next startup. 1. Lineups and independent verification of lineups will be completed on Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) Systems designated by the Operations Engineer within 30 days of the planned reactor startup date. 2. ' Existing lineups will be reviewed by operations Supervision for all plant systems. 3. The lineups of primary containment manual isolation valves outside the dryvell vill be verified and independently reviewed. 4. A random sample of fire barriers will be walked down and verified for compliance with Technical Specifications. 5. Security barriers will be walked down and verified for ec=pliance with the Physical Security Plan. 6. The accuracy of the " Control Room Status File" will be verified by Operations Supervisor. 7. All required Operational Condition 2 surveillances will be completed. 8. Temporary modifications vill be verified for applicab ility. Add it ional It -en Added to Insure Readiress for Rentart i The following additional items vill also be completed to insure readiness for restart: 1. The Reactor Operators responsible for reactor startup will have recently conducted reactor startup evolutions on the simulator. 4-1

Attcebeent 4 2. Outstanding Technical Specification change requests will be reviewed by Operations Supervisica to ensure full compliance with Technical Specifications. 3. The Technical Engineer vill review Deviation Event Reports identified by Nuclear Production management to ensure that they are closed or, if not closed, that they have been determined to not contribute to repetitive events. 4. Nuclear Quality Assurance vill ensure that actions assigned as a result of Licensee Event Reports (LER) are completed or adequately planned. 5. The Reactor Operations Improvement Plan (ROIP) goals listed below are either being met or show a trend toward the established goal. These goals are:

a. Minimize the number of Control Roon nuisance alarms.

b. Minimize the number of Engineering Design Packages (EDP) which are field complete for greater than 30 days but require paperwork closure.

c. Minimize the mucher of time-sensitive Limiting Conditions.for Operation (LCO).

d. Minimize the nucher of " signed on" active work orders (PN-21's).

e. Complete all surveillances within the grace period and minimize the use of the grace period.

f. Minimize the number of Licensee Event Reports (LER).

6. Operational Assurance vill conduct an audit or surveillance of com=itted reactor startup readiness tasks within 30 days of the planned reactor startup date. 4-2

ATTACHED;T 5 4 Actions To Be Completed Af ter Restart Prior to Test Conditien I The following listing are the items which must be completed prior to exceeding 5: power. These items are either the completion of testing which requires the reactor be in operation at low power levels or actions taken to ensure readiness of the facility to support power ascension. Upon successful completico of these items the plant will have met all the technical requirements to exceed 5% power and will be ready to commence Test Condition 1. 1. High pressure coolant injection will be retested and declared operable. 2. Reactor Core Isolation Cooling system will be verified operable. 3. The Main Steam Relief Valve and Auto =atic Depressurization System will be verified operable. 4. Main Steam bypass line expansion will be monitored during testing. 5. South Reactor Feed Pump perfor=ance will be verified by test. 6. Operation and performance of the Off Gas system will be verified by test. 7. Reactor Operations improvement Plan (ROIP) gocis listed below are being met or show a trend toward the established goals:

a. Minimize the nu=h t r of Control Roe = nuisance alarms.

b. Minimize the number of Engineering Design Packages (EDP) which are field cceplete for greater than 30 days but require paperwork closure.

c. Minimize the number of time-sensitive Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO).

d. Minimize the number of " signed on" active work orders (PN-21's).

e. Comp.lete all surveillances within the grace per.iod and minimize the use of the grace period.

f. Minimize the number of Licensee Event Reports (LER).

5-1

Au g: _3 ^ -onFEG AR)S 'NFORMAi10N i [) FEB 01 M'- Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Compan-ATTN: Mr. Donald A. Wells Manager, Quality Assurance 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and B. W. Stapleton of this office on January 10-13, 1984, of activities at Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. W. Fahrner and members of his staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and inter-views vith personnel. No item's of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title 10, Code'of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the prov'ision of 10 CFR 73.21. Con-sequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Docu-ment Roem. A a Er.:icsere Contains SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION Upon separation This Pass is Decontrolled m n pU.,, .,. w.,.,'., 'U U l i'I E U ; dY,ji l : ,,,4.,' C, o,,-~~ vgw4.MbU/WUb s

SACEGLAR)S liiFORMAT OM The Detroit Edison Company 2 FEB 0115M We.will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, i w W. L. Axe o Chief Materials and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report 1 No. 50-341/84-02(DRMSP) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) 4 cc w/ enc 1: IE Files NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB IE/DRP/0RPB ACRS i l cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGIJARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII i Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. i t '.</ra Contains MF2GUAF,0S ItiF0ftttATICil Upon Sep.aration This Page !s Decontrolled RIII RIII RIIJ RIT.I>// RIIT (* ,O ' .,T~ Qill / T G; *,4 i ,/ ( 4 I: f, ,Q aton/rr Madeda [ reed ' li A' s ' N 1/31/84 7/i$) O/Jffg t c, SA:~GL AFe !50E.f.23

L SAFEG_ AR)S \\ ~0N!0N U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-02(DRMSP) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: January 10-13, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: September 26-30, 1983 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Protection d- ' Ms. /. J. t Inspectors: T. J. Madeda 2///h y Physical Protection Specialist Dit6 /. W. Stapleton 3!' I / hysical Protection Specialist Date Approved By: ed, Chief I afeguards Section Date Inspection Summary Inspection on January.10-13, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-02[DRMSP]) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation, installa-tion, operability of the security program, and the precperational testing pro-gram for security-related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Management; Security Program Audit; Testing and Maintenance; Physical Barriers - Protected Areas and Vital Areas; Lighting; Access Control - Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids'- Protected Areas and Vital Areas; Alarm Stations; ... ~ -.;~, Car'~'n' }.. (s-, L- . ;&GG t-w Q ; *. 50GOUtTOIl0 %ggx9 zy. SAFEGLARDS 1 FORMA !ON

l. -

S..?EGUADS IF0PJi A 10" 4 f General Requirements T&Q Plan; Additional Requirements - Power Reactors; and 3 Safeguards Infor=ation. This inspection involved 58 inspector-hours onsite by } two NRC inspectors. ]' status of areas within the security program and identified areas that must be Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified. 4 1 t i i 1 1 1 1 I i i I t I i 1 I i I i i f a 8 o . ~ - ' 7 C:.u. ins C.' .:S ! T: .. _ : :: Ti.. ; ' ~ - - ..; I; Cee;ntralicd ~ SAFEGUARDS q0RM@0?'

3 SECURITY ORGANIZATION 3.1 Establishment of Security Organization $73.55(b)(1) The security plan shall describe the security organization including guards, established to protect the facility against radiological sabotage. guideline An acceptable security plan would typically indicate that the security organization does not have any other respon-sibilities that would conflict with the responsibility to protect against radiological sabotage. Fire brigade duty may be considered as conflicting. $73.55(b)(3)(i) The security plan shall describe, by position title, the person responsible for day-te-day administration of the security organization. guideline An acceptable security program would typically include watchmen and armed response individuals. It should affirm the existence of such positions and identify their purpose and role in the protection of the facility. 973.55(b)(1) If a contract guard force is used, the security plan shall describe a written agreement with the contractor which addresses, as a minimum, the following issues. l l (i) the licensee is responsible to the Commission for maintaining safeguards in accordance with Commission regulations and the licensee's security plan. (ii) the NRC may inspect, copy, and take away copies of all reports and documents required to be kept by Cornission regulations, orders, or applicable license conditions whether such reports and documents are kept by the licensee or contractor, i (iii) the licensee affirms to demonstrate the ability of physical security personnel to perform their assigned duties and responsibilities, including a demonstration of the ability of the contractor's physical security personnel to perform their assigned dutics and responsibilities in carrying out the provisions of the security plan and regula-tions, and (iv) the contractor will rc assign any parsennel to the site who have nct first bean made zwara of thesa responsibilities. @\\

J o i 3.2 Security Oraanization Manacement i The security plan shall describe a management system whose $73.55(b)(3) purpose is to provide for the development, revision, [ implementation, and enforcement of security procedures. An acceptable security plan would typically indicate the guideline chain of command for security (both site and corporate), and site operations by title. An acceptable security plan would typically indicate the guideline point (s) of onsite interface between security and opera-tions by position. $ An acceptable security plan would typically indicate the guideline position onsite with the ultimate security responsibility at all times. An acceptable security plan would typically indicate the guideline delegation of authority for security, starting with the position holding the ultimate security responsibility down to the shif t-to-shift supervision. security plan would typically indicate the An acceptable guideline corporate office to which the onsite security organization can appeal operatiens/ security conflicts. $ The security plan shall indicate that at least one full-time 673.55(b)(2) member of the security organization is onsite at all times who has the authority to direct the physical security activities of the security organization in meeting the postulated threat and is identified by position title. This individual should not have routine assignments, such as manning the CAS, SAS, etc., and must have time to direct all activities of the security organization during an incident. % An acceptable security plan would typically stipulate that guideline the member of the security organization with authority to direct the security organization coordinates with the , individual (plant manager, his designated alternate, shift supervisor, etc.) who has final responsibility for plant operation on a shift. An acceptable security plan would typically describe a clear guideline chain of succession of responsibility for the transfer of authority in the event of disablement of a key member of the physical security organization during an incident. This chain of succession should be described through all levels of the security organi:ation. As part of the management system, the security pian shall $73.55(b)(3) describe written security procedures that document the structure of the security organization and that detail the 6

L duties of guards, watchmen and other individuals responsible for security. As part of the management system, the security plan shall 573.55(b)(3) describe provisions for written approval of procedures and revisions by the individual with overall responsibility for the security function. 3.3 Qualifications for Employment in Security The security plan shall confirm that an individual does 673.55(b)(4) not act as a guard, watchman, armed response person, or other member of the security organization unless such individual has been trained, equipped, and qualified to perform each assigned security job duty in accordance with 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B, " General Criteria for Security Personnel." Note: R.G. 5.20, " Training, Equipping, and Qualifying of Guards and Watchmen," has been superceded by Appendix B and should not be referenced in the plan. NUREG's 0219, 0576, and 0674 contain additional guidance concerning this bullet. The security plan shall confirm that security force personnel $73.55(b)(4) are trained and qualified prior to issuance of an operating license in accordance with a Commission approved training and qualification plan. The security plan shall confirm that security force personnel 573.55(b)(4) j are requalified at least every 12 months in the applicable physical and training requirements identified in 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B, and an approved training and qualifica-l tion plan. The security plan shall confirm that all results of 573.55(b) (1)(ii)(4) suitability, physical and mental qualifications data and test results for security force personnel are documented and made available for NRC inspection. The security plan shall confirm that provisions have been 573.55(b)(4) made to demonstrate the ability of physical security pers'onnel to carry out their assigned duties and respon-sibilities at the request of an authorized representative of the Commission. 3.4 Training of Plant Personnel The following guidelines shculd be taken into consideration when describing security training given te nonsecurity force personnel: An ac::aptable security program would typically include a l guideline i training program for all nonsecurity force personnel authorized unescorted access to the protected area to assure that these individuals understand their role in physical l l l 7

security and their responsibility in the event of security incidents. An acceptable security plan would typically' describe a guideline training program that treats the threat of sabotage and is responsive to deterring, detecting and neutralizing the

threat, An acceptable security program would typically maintain guideline documentation of completed employee training.

An acceptable security program would typically affirm to guideline perform refresher training for such personnel to update security training. 3.5 Local Law Enforcement Liaison The security plan shall describe how liaison with local $73.55(h)(2) law enforcement authorities is established, documented and maintained. An acceptable security plan would typically document the guideline amount of response support available to the site that has ) been a reed upon in writing by all management of offsite s response agencies. One acceptable method is the use of j-their commitment to support the facility during security letters from all offsite response agencies that identify incidents. The letters should state, in general terms, the level of support to be provided. An acceptable security plan would typically describe how guideline i the written agreements of support identify and establish the following: the organization with the authority to direct the response onsite, (i.e., site management, specific LLEA,etc.). the single position of authority within the identified organization. An acceptable security plan would typically indicate the guideline ' position by title onsite at all times (if different from shift-to-shift, identify by shift) that is responsible for coordination with offsite response personnel. 1 An acceptable security plan would typically address the guideline folicwing issues and describe the procedures to provide l for: compatible comunications with offsita response personnel. 8 j

4 ) sufficient escorts for offsite responding personnel. appropriate incident management, security management, and safety interface for offsite response forces at all times. appropriate onsite security force interface, (while onsite). An acceptable security program would typically, on an annual guideline basis, provide all members of offsite response agencies with familiarization and refresher training which includes: plant and site tours. briefings on the security organization, facility personnel responsible during an incident, response procedures, and special constraints imposed on security in protecting a nuclear facility. 3.6 Security Personnel Equipment The security plan shall confirm that all security guards $73.2(c) wear uniforms. An acceptable security program would typically uniform guideline guards to be clearly distinguishable from local law enforce-ment and other onsite personnel. An acceptable security plan would typically describe the guideline manner in which other members of the security organization may be visually identified. The security plan shall confirm that members of the security $73.55(b)(4) force are equipped in accordance with the guidelines of 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B. The security plan shall confirm that, as a minimum, guards Part 73, Appendix B and armed response individuals are armed with.38 caliber revolvers, or equivalent, and have avrilable 12 gauge sho.tguns or semiautomatic rifles. Th'e security plan shall confirm that all on-duty physical 573.55(f)(1) security force personnel (guards, watchmen or armed response individuals) are provided with the capability for continuous communication with the CAS/SAS. The security plan shall describe how all security personnel 573.55(g)(1) equipment including weapons, protective clothing, and vehicles are maintained in operable condition and shall astablish an inspection, tast and maintenanca pr: gram fcr such equipment. 9

I The security plan shall confirm that two way two channel Part 73, Appendix B radios, hardwire intercom, or equiv;1ent are used to provide the capability for continuous communication requirements for certain fixed posts, such as a defensive position or access control station. G e 10

T / M ' A'c childs, Paul A. J @ TITLE: Supervicing Engineer-Nacl:ar Conput:r System ORGANIZATIO N CHARTS N-15, Supervising Engineer SUPERVISOR: app 2 yrs. (tenporcry assignnent to EF2) Bartm n, Steven J. d rh / - ,.4 J@ TITLE: Chemical Engineer OPGANIZATIO E CHART: N-8, Chemical Engineer SUPERVISOR: 1 year Andersen. Falch L. 6[ C/ J @ TITLE: Supervisor-Radiological Engineering OPGANIZATIONAL CHART: N-8, Supervisor-Radiological Engineering SUPERVISOR: 1 1/2 years Nolloth, James P. f E 2' d Eo / - / ; = JT TITLE: Senior Analyst OFGANIZATIONAL CHART: N-15, Supervisor-Operations & Systes SUPERVISOR: 6 years Ward, Robert C. SYU 'M JOB TITLE: Superintendent-Bechtel Corporation ORGAE ZATIONAL CH7RT: N-10, Bechtel Maintenance SUPERVISOR: 5 years (contract erploye at Fermi) ,. e o Perchard. Paul 4. Md,M ~ " JOB 'PI'rrr. 4.neratio' reman-Fermi 2 O-OFGANIZATIONAL M RT:. N-S,-General Forman-Fermi SI " ~ ~ ~ ~ . SUPERVISOR:' 8 years Green, John R. ' 2 6M JOB TITLE: Supervisor-System Engineering OFGANIZATIONAL CHART: N-5, Superviscr-Systa Engineering SUPERVISOR: 6 mos. Sinckin LawrenceA. 5 GT ~ I' ' -00 6 J T TITLE: Directoryaclear')nginee,r.ing /,l ;,/. OFGANIZATIONAL CHARTi N-$, Direct;or-tbclear Edgineering ' SUPERVISOR: '4 ' years \\(s[te), 2 ros. (%itien) I v 7ckerran, William D. ($ f 20 4 l JOB TITLE: Senior Engineer OPGANIZATIONAL CHART: N-4, Supervisor-Planning /Schcduling/ Staff l SUPERVISOR: 1 year Soencer, William W. 86 O/ - /4 J@ TITLE: Senior Analyst ORGANIZATIONAL CHART: N-15, Supervisor-Conputer Applications i SUPERVISOR: 1 1/2 years 'l '-Vl i ~$ .<-l:

l I l NUCLEAR SECURI'N PROCEDURES MASIER LIST l 1 I I i 1 - 1 I DATE I l l l NUMBER l TITLE l l REV l I l I l ISSUED l I l l lNoclear Security Org. & I lT/C 4-25-86 l l l 2000 land Responsibilities l 12/17/84 l 2 l i l I-1 I I I l l Nuclear Security Org. l lT/C 4-25-86 l l l 2002 IWritten Correspondence & l 4/26/85 1 2 l l J IPecords Keecino l l l I l IEmploye Security l l l l 1.2003 ITraining l 11/5/85 I 3 l l l l l I I I I I I I I I l 2004 lon Call Policy l l l l 1 I I I I l l l l l l l l 2005 IStaff Office Operations l l l l l l l~ l l I J lPreparaticn for Hearings -l l l l ) 2006 land Trials i l l-I l-1 I I I i 1 l Operation of Equipnent l lT/C 4-25-86 l l } 2007 lRocra 1 4/2.1/ 86 1 3 i l 1: I I I I I J IConduct of Internal l l l l l 2008 lConpliance Evaluations 1 3/20/86 1 3 l l l I l I I I l INuclear Security l l l l l 2009 lorganizational Staff I l Cum m 112/27/85 l 1 Ivehicle Instructions I l l l l l Evidence, prohibited l lT/C 4-25-86 l l l 2018 literrs, and Property l 8/23/84 1 0 l l 1 Icontrol I l l I l l lT/C 4-25-86 l l l 2019 l Weapons Safety l S/19/83 1 0 l l I I I I I l l IT/C 4-25-86 l l l 2020 ISeal Control l 4/17/85 l 1 l l 1 1 I I I I I -l Owner Controlled l l l [ l 2022 l Personnel, Vehicle & 1 l l l IParkino Control l l l l IProcedure Preparation, I l l l t 2023 laeview, Approval Distrib., l 8/12/85 l 1 l l lRev..Canegliaticn&Destrue.I I l l ILock and key i I I I i2024 lCustcIlian Instructions l 1/24/86 l 2 l l l(SI) l l I I l i T, / eg 4 <VT m i e ,j v e

I I l _. HvCLEAR SrcuP m PPOCEDURES F M R LIST I I I I I l l I DATE I I i l!D EER l TITLE l l REV l l l l 1 ISSUFD l l l ILock and key l l l l l 2025 l Coordinator / Instructions l 1/15/86 l 1 I l l j(SI) l I I l l IIdentification Badging lTeg Change IT/C 4-7-96 I i l 2026 l Coordinator i 1/10/86 l 1 l l l lInstructions I l l 1 l lKeycard Custodian l l l l l 2027 l Instructions l 12/12/84 l 1 l l l l l l I I l IInternal Contract l lT4: 4-25-86 l l l 2028 l Administration l Z/2/84 l 0 l l l 1 I l l I I I I I I I l 2030 l Vehicle Sanitation l l Cancelled l 12/27/85 l 1 I I I I I l l Dress & Appearance I I l l l 2031 IStarx3ards for Uniform l l Cancelled l 12/27/85 l l JFersonnel i I I I l l Notification of I l'E/C 4-25-86 I I l 2032 lPadicactive Materials l S/23/84 1 0 l l l Ishionent i I I I I I I I I I l l Security Cornunications l l l l l 2500 l(SI) 1 2/26/86 1 5 l l I I I I 1 l l l Protected Area Patrol l l l l l 2502 l Procedures (SI) l 4/2S/86 I 3 l l l l l l l I i l l lT/: 4-7-86 l l l 2503 l Fatal Force 1 6/12/84 l 1 l l l l l l l l l l l l'E/C 4-25-86 l l l 2504 lLEIN Machine Operation 1 6/17/85 l 1 l l l l l 1 I I ll l l l'E/C 4-25-86 l l l 2505 ITrespassing l 4/10/85 l 1 l l .I I I l i I I i I l'E/C 4-25/86 l l l 2506 l Arrest & Detention 1 5/10/84 1 0 l l I I I I I I l l l l'E/C 4-7-86 l l l 2507 l Response to Alarms (SI) I 6/24/85 1 4 l l l l l 1 I I l l Surveillance Recuirerents l l l l ,1 2508 l& Procedures (SI) l 4/24/86 1 5 l l J t l IProtected or Vital Ares i l i l i 2509 lEarrier Access Centrol l 4/22/86 l 2 l l il ! Officer (SI) I __j ___ l I L________

I I l wets SUBITY PROCEDURES !! ASTER LIST l I I I I I I I DATE I I I I busER I TITLE I REV l l l I I TSFUED I l l l libclear Security Chief l l l l l 2511 l Duty Instructions (SI) l 4/23/56 I 3 l l 1 1 I I I I l libclear Shift Lieutenant l l l l l 2512 lDuty Instructions (SI) l 4/2S/86 l 6 l l l l__ l l l l l lReponse Force Leader l l l l 1 2513 [ Duty Instructions (SI) l 4/2S/86 1 5 l l l l l l l l l l Warehouse B Officer i l l l l 2514 l Duty Instructions (SI) l 4/21/86 1 2 l l 1 I I I I I l l Access Control Officer l I l l l 2515 IDuty Instructions (SI) l 3/26/84 1 0 i l I l 1 1 I l l l Personnel Search Officer l l l l l 2516 l Duty Instructions (SI) 1 4/24/86 1 7 l [ l I l l l I I l Personnel Escort Officer l l l l l 2517 l Duty Instructions (SI) l 2/7/84 1 0 l l I I I I I I l IVehicle Escort Officer l l l l l 2518 l Duty Instructions (SI) i 11/29/85 l 3 l l 1 I I I I I } IVehicle Search Officer i i l l } 2519 l Duty Instructions (SI) l 4/24/86 1 4 l l l l I I I I i l Response Force Fhnter l l l [ l 2520 l Duty Instructions (SI) l 4/21/86 1 5 l l 1 I I I I I I l Fermi Drive Gate Duty l l 2 l l l 2521 lInstructions l S/23/84 ITerp Change l l I l 17/17/85 l l l IFermi I Gate Duty l 1 l l l 2522 l Instructions l 9/1/84 l l CAlmm i I l l I I I l lOwner Controlled Area l l l l l 2523 l Patrol Duty l 3/3/86 l 1 l l l lInstructions l l l l l lRHR Surveillance Post l l l l l 2524 IPost Duty Instructions l 3/26/84 1 0 l l l l(SI) I l l l l lCAS Operator Duty l l l l l 2525 IInstructicns (SI) l 4/2S/86 1 6 l l 1 I I i l ISAS Operator Duty l l l l 2526 IInstructicns (SI) ! 1/31/S5 l 4 l l I

-_= __ l. I I NUCIEAF SECURI7Y PROCEDURES PASTER LIST l l l l l l l l DATE I I I 1 NUMBER l TITLE I I REV I l t i I I ISSuEn i I l l l l IT/C 4-25-86 I I l l 2540 INOC Bonb Treat Procedures l 5/5/83 1 0 l l l I I I I I l l l l l l l l Fuel Storage l l l l l 2550 IPesponse Procedure (SI) l l Cancelled l 5/19/86 l l l l l l l l l Controlled Access 1 -1 I I l 2551 l Area Access Control l l Cancelled i 5/19/86 l 1 loff. Duty Instrue. (SI) l I I I I INew Fuel Feceipt l l l l l 2552 l& Storage Audit l l Cancelled l 5/19/86 I I IProcedpfe (SI) I l l I I lhtclear Security l l l l l 2553 l Dispatcher Duty Instruc. I 1L(17/83 l Cancelled l 5/19/86 l l Ifor new fuel sto.CAA (SI) l l l l l INuclear Shift Lt. 1 I l l l 2554 l Duty Instruc. for new fuell 3/8/84 l Cancelled l 5/19/86 I I .lstorage contr.olled;ccessArea (SI) I l l I l Controlled Access iTenp Change l I l l 2555 lArea Monitor's Duty l 3/19/85 l Cancelled l 5/19/86 l l IInstrue. for new fuel ste. Area (SI) l l l l 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i l i I I I I I I I I J l l i I I ) l I I I i 1 1 1 I l l ) 1 l i l l 3 I I I I I I I I I I I J l' I I I I 3 I I I I I

I I l SPIP PPiX'EDURES PASTER LIST l 1 I I I I I I DATE I I l l 1REBER l TITLE l l REV I l l I I ISSUED l l l l l 1 1 I I lSPIP-1 [Perscnnel Screening l 3/18/86 1 6 l l l l l I l l l l 1 l Cum m I l ISPIP-2 IPersonnel Identification 1 3/4/86 1 3 l l 1 I l l I I I I I I I I lSPIP-3 IBa3ging l OV23/86 l 4 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lSPIP-4 l Security Iccess Control 1 05/12/86 l 8 l l l l l l l I I Isecurity Peporting i l l l lSPIP-5 lPequirements 1 01/24/86 1 4 l l l l l l l I l l Protected Area Vehicle l I l l lSPIP-6 l Traffic aM Parking l 05/07/86 1 5 l I l IControl l I l I l l Security During l l l l lSPIP-7 10perational Emergencies 1 11/4/85 1 2 l l I f(SI) l I I I I I I I I I ISPIP-8 [ Visitor M:r.ittance i 11/22/85 1 4 l l I I I I I I I I l'. I I I ISPIP-9 l Escorts for Visitors ard I 11/22/85 l 4 l l l ! vehicles l I I l l IIncorring Pa:kage ard l l l l lSPIP-10 Irraterial control (SI) 1 03/04/86 l 3 l l 1 l l l I l l l Routine and unannounced l l l l ISPIP-11 l Inspections or 1 01/23/86 1 3 l l I ISearches i I I I l l Requesting off-site I i l l ISPIP-12 l Assistance (SI) I 11/4/85 l 1 l l I I I I I I l l Security Tours by l l l l lSPIP-13 IDesignate3 Plant' l 2/4/86 l 2 l l l lPersopppl i l I I l l ISecurity Equiptrent I l l l lSPIP-14 l Maintenance 1_05/07/86 1 3 l l I I [ l l J l i I I I I ISPIP-15 l Lock aM Key Centrol l 05/07/86 1 4 l l I I I I I I

I l l SPIP PROCEDURES PASTER LIST l i I I .J l i I DATE I I I l h1HBER I TITLE I I REV I i 1 I I ISSUED I I l l lBoabs and other overt l l l l lSPIP-16 l Threats (SI) I 11/4/85 l 2 l l I 1 I I l I I I I I I I lSDIP-17 ITLD Control I l Cancelled i 5/15/86 I I I I I I l l l l l l l lSPIP-19 l Cancelled l I I l 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ISPIP-3CTINew Fuel Tenporary l IV4/85 1 2 I I J_ IStorace (SI) I I I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I I I I I i l l l l l 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I l l l l l l l 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l i I I I I I I l I l i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l l l 1 I I I I I i i I I i i l l I I l l 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I I I I I I l l I l l l l l l l l l 1 1 I l .l. I I I I I I I I l l l l l 1 1 I I I I I l l l l l 1 1 I l l I I I I I l

( ,t a Y,y,cC. ' Y.* -'. ' C. 0 W$)g (t Cog s Goal A, NjectiV8 2C O 3 ggpgg Corduct a surveillance of tnis effort during the review of the Security Plan ard Implenenttrg, I Coduct a surveillance of this ef fort g,3, durirg the review cf compertsatory measures. Due - May, July, October l Due - May, August, tbverber 6".. (14"* 0 huQ Sme,hyg M g';',b WyJP P h Q.#].diJ 6 ,&s g E,*. ~E. -34L I fs Goal A, m;ective 10e k Coal B, Cto.ective 4c Corduct a surveillance of this effort durirq the review of personnel T&Q - Corduct a surveillance cf this effort General during the review of testirg ard maintenance Due - May, August, Noverrber Ibe May, July, Octtter I

u.:..r (av.'> w.~ e %Ah sluj%.

' rc.Eu e (e-r..4, Scae A ut %.1 6]h c. , 1.t s r. e Lie t c w tn. '.Li r i 4-- ?r.n.-- y-, ar u r - r,gga wpu. ~. y,r, x;_7-- p,mmyyp rg.,aw gw-p -bn b. --. m.. w:: :r.c._ _en.,i 4 : _-*'*'V".i' C -M- ' ~ ~ ~ ~ '..,s ~. * *, ' Goal:A, 2]ective Sb ~ ' ' - .' ' c.," ' Ol C corduct a surveillance of this effort Goal B, mjective lg durits the review of Access Control

Vehicles, Corduct a surveillance cf this effort durirq the review of I'.anagement Due - May, July, October Effectivaness.

j Due - May, Septer-ber, Dececber i n P. k a-hinA*.) SN(inoaxe hd.Q.p/,94 - -* wc/. S t'negtre ('t'T.M %,-ao \\ bx < *h tb %* T w e:m _..s f]W .r 2.M O enk r *^ e bn o Coal A, %jective le Goal A, eservatien 6c Cerduct a s: ave 111ance cf this effert durirn Corduct a surveillance cf this effert the review cf the Physical barriers - Vital durirg the review of Access Control - Areas. Persennel D.e - May, J.:1y, Oct:ter D.e w y, July, Cct:ber a i t,,y Cw-* a*' h-c; - M2+ den C.M

2

.wc te.. _,

a..s f==. -: ~ ~ -u n g

.>..u I~' M I M. - A .N W N m

6 4 G:AL A: Implement a management syster-to ceduct Correct dverse trerds. surveillances require by cemitments @ L B*. W.ssto W m as m proc & res fcr CEVECTn'E 2* TeyJarements fCT Wrts ani cperay1:$gy testr tre micerwave ega:pment the reber of security personnel e all Phyracal p'qY % WMW 9: hours to accomplish. pet I L 1 GOAL A: Irrplemnt a management system to coduct CCAL B: Ccrrect dverse treds. surveillances req;ird by c:rr.ittnents. ca7Ec' int 4: Improve maintenance of x-ray, enetal ad C6JECnT 10: Ensure Security Officers have rnet explosive detection eqaitrent to achieve an in-all SP M Plan criteria

service rate of 50% or rcre on each type cf egal;ren*

in each pertal. j ..w. e, -- m I,'...

w. u.=.w = x,_.

g_, _ s=_ w _W ~. y CEAL A: Irnplement a management systee to ecduct surveillances reqJird by ccer 1trents. COAL B: Cerrect dverse treds. CNECn't 9: Codu t a 100% review cf the vehicles CETECnT 1: Fduce personnel errors resulting permaner.tly authcrizd insde the Protectd Area, free irgroper use of keycards ad decrs to less than 10 per month without chars;ing the dofinition. t- -4 h, I T A *. A : l 1.*P e v t a r.v:o +-+ ~ surve111ct.:es regaa rd t c-h* **sys tr.- ~ ~.. U.A: ;gewr.t amamasp :: c: 2 ~ 4. s* s;:,e:11a.:es reTaard by ::evi:Nn*3. CUEC' nT 1: I,pele"er.t process docr che:ks utilizir.; see rlty ch' r verif Tre:t ce pmss hr a~~ M ater* terpcrazy 6 cess to ::,es r. t per r.t.tly X:cssp in:Idan; si pilfy:ng tr.e ree:d keepng.

m bcctk b DOITC)ll Ob ; b J ,d,i A q D. =..,,c w. ~. = n :.w.,, a n u m _ a m :. a.z w. w. ~_ h m TURt; STILE OFFICER DUTY It STRUCTI0t;S The following are basic duty instructions for officers assigned duties as PAP /AAP Turnstile officer. (1) Confines of the post are in the immediate vicinity of the egress side of the turnstiles. (2) Officers have 3 main functions to perform: (A) Insure keycards do not leave the Protected Area. (B) Comp. Measure for Inactive Bolt positions on turnstiles. (C) Insure only authorized materials leave the protected area. (3) Officer will insure keycards are removed from drop-boxes are placed in correct Badge Booth as soon as possible after deposit and boxes locked (4) Insure materials have caterial pass with authorized signature. (5) Perfora additional duties as directed by CAS/SAS, SL/RFL. (6) Emergency Duties: All emergencies will be controlled by SAS/CAS. Officers will follow instructions issued by CAS/SAS, SURFL. They may include but are not limited to the following. (A) Halting Ingress / Egress to the portal when directed by CAS/SAS, SL/PEL. (B) Halting Ingress / Egress through trunstiles when directed by CAS/SAS, SL/RFL. (7) Any questions t'Earding the post or unusual circumstances which may arise will be directed to CAS/SAS, SL/RFL. i N/ \\ / Approved: _1 Walter P. Hawkins Chief-fluelear Security r s

~ y C o o_. I d._ O hy. lc I ~ l I o O I I e s K \\ t 8 i t / i / l l \\ / \\ l I l ,/ i.t.3 ) = \\._.,' / A' t p., N e') s7-.. uA I u' PA P Persennd bn, a44u. / rt-o r c 4 e ( 5'a. s -Is 4kt c u., 4. P-3 pu.Ilej, T. $ will 85 Us u.m t SLtpos'oken [, de s iy a t a j,,, + L e I,,.,tu /

c. ire i e,

~ IO A.dd s N a ra.l t r$cna, /~ b I*a**['#*' /N-

Ciud S [fp o W hu bes/naIs'= Pe c3 on r,e( '~ for e3r<ss. 1 s :& c.ve n4 P-s is Palled, u -2. will a.ssac hs pos;4:en deseyr&a ?..- P-S. AddikenAl pt rSO Ant l c r? ~ h 8 b A.V AIl Abl6j ([.6. kl

1, L4 -)

P-6), u,,, e t,,0,11 b e. p e s4 d t r [l b a.ssis4, u.-2, p-8 (~ G G () ) P-5 u.-3 p4 (dtco) s + , + = v e 1 I

pd e

s 9 t

NSIP ACTION ITEM TRACKDG o ITEN_JUMBER SCUFCE Rr2 t.xt. CE KDULE FRDQUDCY_.DUE DATE_,CCMPLETED RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NS001 NSIP A1.a 981054 WEEXLY SHFT LT SHIFT LIIUTENAhT PANDCtEY VERIFIES DOOR CHICKS NS002 NSIP Al.b 981054 FDtEY GOANS SIC GIEP PA!OCNLY VERIFIES ECOR CHECKS NS003 NSIP A1.c/d 981054 MAY EDRTSON NIC MCWLE - PHYSICAL BARRIERS-VITAL AREAS NS003 NSIP Al.c/d 981054 JULY FORTSON hT MCOULE - PHYSICAL BAPRIERS-VITAL AREAS NS003 NSIP A1.c/d 981054 CCIT ER FORISON h% F0DULE - PHYSICAL BARPlERS-VITAL AREAS NS004 NSIP A2.a 181018 CGPIETE APRIL EORTE LIST A RBDUIRED PSP REPORTS AND OP TESTS NS005 NSIP A2.b 181018 FDh'IELY TAYLOR FDNI'IOR CCMP G RDQD PSP REPORIS MO OP TES'IS pS006 NSIP A2.c/d 181018 FRY FITZSD2ON NIC KDULE - SICURITY PIAN AND Ib7MERG PRCCEDS SS006 NSIP A2.c/d 181018 JULY FIWSD7DS 2 KDULE - SECURIW PIAN MS DG'LD'ENTUG PRCCIDS js006 NSIP A2.c/d 181018 (CIGER IT2SD2DN NIC MJDULE - SECUPlTY PLAN MD IbZl2GEING PRCCIDS

S007 NSIP A3.a 181018 WEEKLY THET LT SHIFT LT FDNI'IORS POST GICKLISTS ON EACH SHIET lS008 NSIP A3.b 181018 JUNE

'AMS C SEC GIEP RMOCIEY VERIFIES POST GICKLISTS 1 5008 NSIP A3.b 181018 SEPTHEER 'ES C SEC GIEP RMOCIEY VERIFIES POST GECKLIS'IS 1 S008 NSIP A3.b 181018 DECDEER DANS SEC GIEP RMOCIEY VERIFIES POST CHECKLISTS 1 3009 NSIP A3.c/d 181018 MAY ETZSIFTON l NIC KDULE - SECURITY PIAN MD IMPLDE. TUG PPCCIDS E009 USIP A3.c/d 181018 JULY

TZSDfCN NBC FEULE - SECURITY PIAN MD IMPLDECDG PRCCEDS
009 NSIP A3.c/d 181018 CCIGER TZSDTON NIC EDULE - SECURITI PIAN MO D7M7FI!G PRCCIDS 310 NSIP A4.a 3 E1022 CCMFIZE APPlL CMPSC: ;

TFAIN 10 NS PERSCt:E IN SURVEIIlA!CE TECHNICUES /

N5IP ACTION ITEM TPACKING ITDl_NtDEER SCUICE i<rrul2CE EDULE FREUEtCY_p0E DATE_CCMPLETID RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NS0ll NSIP 'A4.b 381022 CCMPLETE APRIL KORTE EXPASD SCCPE T PSP AUDIT NS012 NSIP A4.c 381022 CCMPIETE APRIL KORTE ANNUAL AUDIT T NUC SECURITY NS013 NSIP A4.d 381022 APRIL KORTE INCLUDE ITEMS FRCH PRIOR SURVEILLANCES IN CURRE'77 SURVS NS014 NSIP A4.e 381022 JUNE 2ORTE hT KDULES - CCMPLETE FIRST SURVEILIANCES - 22 IE EDULES NS015 NSIP A4.f 381022 JUNE 'IECMPSON VERIFY EFFECTIVENESS CF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS IN NSIP NS016 NSIP AS.a 181018 CCMPIETE APRIL KORTE SUBbiIT PSP CHANGES - REV 9 CS017 NSIP AS.b 181018 APRIL APRIL CORTE VERITY PSP CHANGES ARE INCORPORATED Ih'IO PRCCEDURES 1S018 NSIP AS.c/d 181018 MAY 'IT2 SIMON hE MODULE - SICURITI PLAN A!O IMPLDETI?G PROCEDS IS018 NSIP AS.c/d 181018 JULY 'IT2SIF9DN hK KDULE - SECURI'IY PLAN ML IMPTE7?I!G PRCCEDS S018 NSIP AS.c/d ILt0lr CCIOBER ITZSIM ON h% 50DULE - SECURI'IY PLAN AND IF.PLDO72HG PRCCEDS 5019 NSIP A6.a 1481070 CCMPLETE APRIL DANS l CORR ACT 'IO ENSURE TEMP ZONES ARE AUHIORIZID $020 NSIP A6.b 1481070 NEELY ET LT REVIE TEMP ZONE CHA!GES ON EICR SHIFT 1021 NSIP AS.c/d 1481070 MAY lLISE l NIC 50D0LE - ANS cot 7fRCL-PERSOt2E b21 NSIP A6.c/d 1481070 JULY LISE hT MCDULE - ACCESS COtTTRCL-PERSOtCEL e21 NSIP A6.c/d 1481070 CCICBER IgSE NIC KDULE - AS CO!7fRCL-PERSCNE I22 NSIP A7.a 1481070 APRIL bELA E 100% RLVIII4 CF BACKGRCUtD FILES u23 NSIP A7.b/c 1481070 MAY ISE 15C KDULE - ACCESS CO!7 TROL-PERSCMEL 23 SSIP A7.b/c 1451C70 JULY 'SEN hT M'LE - ACCZSS CC!GCL-PERSCl2EL w

NSIP ACTION ITM TRACKING I'fDLNUMBER SCUICE RE ERENCE EDULE FRIQUEtCY_pOE DATE_CCHPLETED RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NS023 NSIP A7.b/c 1481070 CCICBER KALISEE NRC MCDULE - ACCESS CONTROL-PERSONNEL NS024 NSIP A8.a 0 CCMPLETE APPlL NAVEAUX 100% REVIN T ZO!ES EUR ALL KEYCAPD HOLDERS NS025 NSIP A8.b/c 1481070 MAY KALISEX NIC MCDULE - ACCESS COhTROL-PERSOt0EL RS025 NSIP A8.b/c 1481070 JULY E ISIE NIC MCDULE - ACCESS CONTRCL-PERSONNEL E025 NSIP AB.b/c 1481070 OC7OBER ULLISEE NIC KDULE <WS COhTROL-PERSOt0iEL iS026 NSIP A9.a 1681073 CCMPIrrE APRIL iCANS INVEN'IORY ALL VEHIER9 INSIDE PROlu;na APIA IS027 NSIP A9.b/c 1681073 MAY DJWEPS NIC !KDULE - AS CONTRCL-VEHICLES IS027 NSIP A9.b/c 1681073 JULY CUhT.RS NIC FIDULE - ACCESS CONTROL-VERIER 9 S027 NSIP A9.b/c 1681073 (CTCBER CWEPS NIC KDULE - ACCESS COhTROL-VEHICLES S028 NSIP A10.a 2181088 KEIELY E?r LT l WEEKLY GJAL REVIEW G ALL SHIFT PERSOtaiEL TPAINI!G %029 NSIP A10.b 2181088 FOh'IHLY EC CHIEF MOtTiHLY Pf/IEW SPT&Q CRITERIA EVR SHIFT PERSOh7EL l 5030 NSIP A10.c/d 2181088 MAY TIl' Y NIC KDULE - PERSONNEL T&O-GENERAL $030 NSIP A10.c/d 2181088 AUGUST y NIC KDULE - PERSO!OEL T&N 1 !030 NSIP 'A10.c/d 2181088 NO7iMBER riFY NIC KDULE - PERSOtOEL T&Q-CE!ERAL l 031 NSIP All [ 481034 APRIL APRIL W PSON UPGRADE HK INST FOR CONDUCT OF INTER!AL COMP EVAL (NS2008)

032 NSIP Bl.a 281020 CCMPLLTE APRIL

~ C CHIE ASSIGN TWO TFICEPS DURING PEAK PERICDS AT PORTALS 1 033 NSIP Bl.b 281020 CCPPLETE APPJL kGC }CNITOR !CES - DOORS AND KEYCAIDS - UhTIL LESS 7EAN 10/FD 034 NSIP 31.c 281020 SCO '1 BTI!GS FCTIFlli CClIL'TICATICN TO SR ?GC - PEFSCN'ZL ERICPS

ta97&S8tNDJ8 eld TMnn ITDUEMBER SCUICE REERDCE FEDULE FRECUEtCY_pUE DATE_ COMPLETED RESPONSIBLE DFECRIPTION NS035 NSIP Bl.d 281020 JUNE HASTI!GS FONITCP/REVIS0 CUARTERLY CDRR ACTION ON NCRS NS035 NSIP Bl.d 281020 SEPTDSER HASTnGS FONITOR/REVIEN CUARTERLY CDRR ACTION ON !CRS NS035 NSIP Bl.d 281020 DECDSER HASTI?GS F0tHTOR/REVIBi CUARTERLY CDRR ACTION ON ICRS NS036 NSIP Bl.e 281020. FONIHLY NAVEAUX ItCLUDE SEC CORR ACT INFO IN 'INO WEERLY "FKDEPA70RS" NS037 NSIP Bl.f 281020 FONIELY hMTJUX INCLUDE SEC CORR ACT INFO IN DAILY PLAhT STATUS REPORT NS038 NSIP Bl.g/h 281020 MAY NSFGiT NIC MCDULE - F'MSDE.T EETECTIVENESS NS038 NSIP Bl.g/h 281020 SEPTDBER NSbGC hT FEDULE - MANAGDENT n1rLTIVENESS US038 NSIP Bl.g/h 281020 DECEGER GGC hT FrOULE - MANAGDER ertLTIVH;ESS IRS039 NSIP B2 281020 CTPIETE APRIL bSOC ISSUAtCE m NCD-38 (VP-NO) ISO 40 NSIP B3 281020 JUNE PAFER FGC 2CETHGS WIIH FATAINDU UNIT CFFICERS SO40 NSIP B3 281020 SEPTDEER HAFER FGC FrNS WIDI BARGADHtG UNIT TFICERS SO40 NSIP B3 281020 DECDEER P R T.R !GE MEETING 3 WIMI BAPGAINHG U1HT CFFICERS 5041 NSIP B4.a 681042 CmPLETE APRIL tSTRUS l IMPROVE MAIhT FDNIIORIFG MD TPACKUG SYSTDI ON EUJIPFENT $042 NSIP B4.b 381042 CCrGLETE APRIL ANS l INITIATE CCHP MEASURES IN A TDELY MANNER 1043 NSIP B4.c/d 681042 MAY AIR NIC MCDULE - TESTnG MD MADCHWCE 143 NSIP B4.c/d 681042 JULY AIR l hT FEDULE - TESTRE NO MAIhTHWEE g43 NSIP B4.c/d 681042 CCICBER nIR hT FEDULE - TESTHE MD MAHERWCE 244 NSIP 2 5.c 6E1042 CC:... :. ?!I:GS D'PR7/E PAD"2 ('CCPZ:G & TRUC:G) CF EUJIP IN C2O MEAS nen.c

NW EITON ITEM TRACKING ITEM _NUfEER SCUICE REERDCE MEULE FREQUDCY_pUE DATE_CCHPIRITD RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NSO45 NSIP B5.b 681042 !{NIHLY TAYIOR RECORD CAUSE FOR EQUIP REQ CCEP MEASURES OVER 5 DAYS NSO46 NSIP B5.c 681042 M IHLY TAYIDR MAIhTAIN BQUIP SO LESS 'IHAN 3 CCMP MEASURES 90% T TIME NSO47 NSIP B5.d 681042 FDhTILY HASTINGS INSTI'IUTE CDRR ACT (EF2 MT) WHEN B5.b and B5.c NOT MET NSO48 NSIP B5.e 681042 WED1Y TAYLOR SEC STAFF MDEER 'IO ATTHO PN-21 WOPR GROUP MEETHES NSO49 NSIP B5.f/h 681042 MAY TAYLOR NIC MCDULE - TESTING A!D MAIhTDWEE NSO49 NSIP B5.f/h 681042 JULY IAYLOR NBC bEDULE - TESTIbG AND MAIhTHWCE RSO49 NSIP B5.f/h 681042 CCIOBER rAYLOR hr MCDULE - TESTnG A!D MAIhTHWCE G5050 NSIP B5.g 681042 WED1Y IAYLOR SEC STAFF bEEER 'IO ATTDD POD MEETHUS IS051 NSIP B6.a 681042 WEERLY %YLOR SEC STAFF MDEER 'IO ATIED MELTnGS ON EDP/PN-21 IS052 NSIP B6.b/c 681042 MAY ILAIR NIC f(DULE - TESTnG AND MAIhTSWEE IS052 NSIP B6.b/c 681042 JULY IAIR NIC MCDULE - TESTnG AND MAIhTDWCE S052 NSIP B6.b/c 681042 OCICBER [ AIR NTC.6 - TESTnG AND MAH7fEWCE B053 NSIP B7.a 681042 APRIL APRIL %' LOR IDEEIFY ALL SEC SYSTD4 DDUIP REQUIRING PRE 7 MAR.T l s054 NSIP B7.b 681042 VM WLOR FM INSTIUCTIONS WRITTEN ON SEC SYSTai DQUIPbEITT ) 5055 NSIP B7.c 681042 JUNE LYLOR PM SCHEDULING D7IERVALS ESTABLISHED l 5056 NSIP B7.d 681042 JULY h0R CD4PLETE bONI'ICRnG CF PREV MADEDWCE k< 57 NSIP B7.e/f 681042 MAY IR NIC MCCULE - TESTnG A!D LAUTIEWCE 057 NSIP 37.e/f 531C42 JL~.Y IR .WC FCCULE - TESTING A!O PAH O W CE -___,--3 ,~y y ,w i-- w7--, w-i-r r

r=6u AJdUN ITai TRACrgN3 ITDUUMBER SCUBCE ErrtMlCE ICDULE FREQUDCY pUE DATE_,CCMPLE'ITD RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NS057 NSIP B7.e/f 681042 OCICBER BIAIR NBC FEDULE .TES"'I?G AFD MAINfESABCE NS058 MSIP BB 281020 AUGUST NStG T h'AREHCUSE B EXCLUDID FRCM PFUiu;rw AREA NS059 NSIP B9.a 1281064 FON'IHLY SIC CHIEF SIC CHIEF 10NI70PS CO@ b'M:' CCMPLIANCE FCh"lELY NS060 NSIP B9.b/c 1281064 MAY NSM NIC FDDULE - CCrPCs'SAIDW MEASURES NS060 NSIP B9.b/c 1281064 AUGUST NSM h7C FEDULE - CC2@ENSA70W MEASURIS NS060 NSIP E9.b/c 1281064 NO\\DGER NDGfI' hTC FEDULE - CCt!PDiSA70W MEASURES NS061 NSIP B10.a 281020 CO@LETE APRIL LIMAN FOO DPHASIZI?G PRIORI 7Y FOR SIC DDUIPFCT MAIhT NS062 NSIP B10.b 281020 FDNIHLY FIASTIFGS FEETINGS b'ITH PLT bER, GD-DER, GD-NOS ON PRIORITIES % 063 NSIP B10.c/d 281020 MAY IHCEPSON h7C bODULE - FW';AGDO.T 12ru.nVENESS 1 hS063 NSIP B10.c/d 281020 SEPEGER CHOFSCW NBC FEDULE - MANAGDO.T trru.rItTsESS 1 hS063 NSIP B10.c/d 281020 DECEMBER IIOFSON NIC FEDULE - MANAGDENT 122tLTIVENESS IS064 NSIP B11 281020 CCMPLLTE APRIL IIUDER RE-h' RITE GET SECURITI MCDULE 1 S065 NSIP Bil.a 281020 APRIL APRIL 7UDER ENSURE UPGPADID GET TPAINIm IS IMPL32. TID 5066 NSIP Bil.b 281020 FOh'IHLY 7UDER l RANDCN SAMPLING 70 VERIFY TPAINING 122unIVDESS S067 NSIP C1.a 681042 CCr@LLTE APRIL DRTE RLVISE PROCIDURES - DISCUSS CHANGES b'I7H MAIhTDWCE b068 NSIP C1.b/c 681042 MAY I. AIR NIC SEDULE - TESTI1G A!O MAIhTHIAFCE 1 h068 NSIP C1.b/c 681042 JULY AIR h7C FEDULE - TESTI?G AND MAIhTDWEE 1 L [C6S NSIP C1.b/c !S1042 CC r EP LAIR NTC SCULE "TST:'G NC :% :,2;A'CE

Mu a.T1UN ITDI TRACKItG ITDUUMBER SamCE REERDCE MCDULE FREQUE!CY pUE DATR_ COMPLETED RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION NS069 NSIP C2.a 281020 COGLETE APRIL EORTE SUBMIT PSP, REV 9 70 hTC REGION III NS070 NSIP C2.b 281020 JU!E HASTIFES REVIBi AfD REWRITE ALL SIX3JRITY JCB DESCRIPTIONS NS071 NSIP C2.c/d 281020 MAY 'IEO@ SON fBC K00LE - MANAGDET tmA.nVENESS NS071 NSIP C2.c/d 281020 SEPTDEER 7EQ@ SON h7C KDULE - MANAGEET EETECTIVENESS NS071 NSIP C2.c/d 281020 DECEtGER IEOGSON NIC KDULE - MGGDENT EETECTIVDESS WS072 NSIP C3.a 281020 kHELY RSTI?GS DIR-NS NORRLLY ATIDOS UNIFORED SECTION SUPV E.LTINGS QS073 NSIP C3.b 281020 CO N'rE APPlL IMAEDS CONDUCT EUSSINESS/ DINNER MEETI?GS WI'IH ALL SEC PERSON!EL lS074 NSIP C3.c 281020 kHKLY GANS HCLD COGINED DECO /EURNS SHIFT BRIEPI?GS 3075 NSIP C3.d 'ASTI?ES 281020 FChTILY DIREC70R ATTHDS SHIFT BRIEPINGS S076 NSIP C4.a 281020 APRIL APRIL dTI!CS CBTAIN E2 SR !Gir APPVL, ISSUE !XD 905 ON NS $077 NSIP C5 281020 APRIL APRIL > RTE UPGRADE, SIMPLIFY, CLARIFY, WCE INSTFJCTIONS (NS PROCEDS) l E078 NSIP C6.a 2181088 CO@LETE APPlL LSTIBCS ENSURE SEC PEPSONIEL UtDER.STA!D IE 85-97 (MA'IL FALSE S'IM

079 NSIP C6.b

!EE 2181088 JUNE l INCLUDE IE 85-97 IN SECURITI ANNL%L RECUAL PRCGPAM

080 NSIP C6.c 2181088 AUGUST EE l

INCLUDE IE 85-97 IN INITIAL SECURITI TRAINI!G 081 NSIP C6.d/e 2181088 MAY TY h7C KOULE - PERSON!EL T&Q - GDERAL ?81 NSIP C5.d/e 2181088 AUGUST TY h7C KDULE - PERSONIEL T&Q - GCEPAL )81 USIP C5.d/e 2181068 NC'! DEER TY NrC KDULE - PEPSO!E T&Q - GDEPAL 82 NSIP C7.a 3E1022 JT_Y 2 GEi EIE-NDS I'.7C/ZICN CF ALL A-A:O M-GFACE SIC PEFS

NSIP ACTION ITD4 TIGCK'ING IT$M_JiUSBER SCUICE RTERDCE RIXJLE FREQUDCY JXJE DATE._CCNFLETED RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION 15083 NSIP C8.a 2281501 FDNIHLY 3HFT LT SHIFT LT DOCUMDfIS RESULTS T SAE'EGJAICS DRILLS <S084 NSIP C8.b 2281501 JUNE EE CONDUCT QTRLY DOC RESUL'IS T M'IHLY SAFH3UARDS DRILLS hS084 NSIP C8.b 2281501 SEPTDGER LGEE COtDUCT QI'RLY DCC RESULTS T FfIHLY SAFEGUARDS DFTT.TS iS084 NSIP C8.b 2281501 DECDGER BEE CONDUCT QTRLY DOC RESULTS T FfIHLY SAFEGUARDS DFTT.Ts !S085 NSIP CS.c/d 2281501 MAY CUWERS ? tic FEDULE - SAFEGUARDS CONTItGDCY PIM S085 NSIP C8.c/d 2281501 AUGUST ERS NIC F1DULE - SAFIGUARDS COI.TItGEtCY PLAN 1 S085 NSIP C8.c/d 2281501 NOVDGER DUWEPS NIC MCDULE - SAFIGUAFDS CO!.TINGDCY PIM S086 NSIP DI.a 181018 CCHPLETE APRIL GTINGS ASSIGN SPECIFIC SHIT LT 'IO RWIIM EACH PRCCIDURE S087 NSIP Dl.b 181018 FDNIHLY DRTE DETERCNE CHANGES /IMPLDC1T PRCCIDURES (5/tCNIH) $088 NSIP D2 181018 DEI'DSER LSTI?GS EMPLO'l CONSULTANT 'IO RU/IEW PSP, SCP RD TSO PIMS f089 NSIP D3.a 281020 !c7IHLY LSTItGS CONDUCT ItTTEWIEMS WI'IH JCE ENRICEMD7T PARTICIPANTS

090 NSIP D4 481034 FGNIHLY STI?GS REVIEW OA MD NIC INSPECTIONS hTIH STAFF I

l@91 NSIP D5 281020 DECDSER STI?US REDUCE PEPSCGNEL ERROR RTORTABLE EVD7IS 50% BELCW 1985 1 TAL IL'MBER ACTION ITDs 139 -lr; / Q:. + 4 p b ~

EUJIF)ENT-{P TEST I ECUIPMENr l1 - 8HRl2 - 8HRl4 - 8HRll DAILYll-7 DAYS lCUARTERlS-YRLY YRLY[ _l l j j .lExplo11ve Detector l l l l x l l l l l 'l Metal Detector l x l l l l l l l l l lX-Ray Machine l x l l l l [ [ [ [ l Graphic Display Bds La@ Test l l l l x l l l l l

l Intrusion Detector Equip.

l l l l l l [ l l 'l Microwaves l l l l l x I x l x l 1

lInfrcreds I

l l l l x l x l x I i l Gate:/ Doors Position Indic. l l l l l l l l l

lBolt Position l

l l l l x l l l l .l Balanced Magnetic Switches l l l l l x [ l l l ITanper Iniacating Alarms I I I l l l l lx l !l Supervisory Alarns I l l 1 l l 1 lx I 'ICDMJNICATIONS l l l l l l l l l "l Portable Radios l x l l l l l l l l

lRadios w/ Sheriff /hiState Pol. l l

1 l x l l l l .lPlant Phone System I x l l l l l l l l l Plant Hi-Coin System I x l l l l l l l l IC:ntury Telephone System I l I l x l 1 l l 1

lEdison Leased Lines l x l

l l l 1 I [ l ,lI4CKING EARDWARE DOORS / GATES l l l l l l l l l l'IO VERIFY SECURD A!D CHKZ l l l l l l l l l lFOR SIGNS OF TAMPERING (Wr l l l l l l l l l lOP TESTS) l l l l l l l l l lG2tts, Walls, Fences l l l x l l l l l l lInterior Vital Area Doors l x l l l l l l l l l Exterior Vital Area Doors l l x l l l l l l l IRECOES l l l l l l l l l IPoint Record Book l l l l l l l l l l7 day CP Test Feports l l l l l l l l l lOff. Vital Barrier Door check l l l l l l l l l l Maintenance Records l l l l l l l l l l Corp PO/Qtr,s-ann, annual l .l l l l l l 1 l l l l 1 l l l l l l l l 1 l l 1 l l l l lwrE: ALL EUJIPreer cP-2mua l l l l l l l l l 0: PRIOR 'IO REIURNING 'IO l l l l l l l l l l SEPVICE O KE MADE l l l l l l l l l B IscrIVE. l l l l l l l l l C v;

&x 3 o ... v..c o SNl TU J. oh.g ;* m r.3,r fy! h... i r 7n g r, p n ,w I J m. i V ih t i J nV APR 0 61934 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and B. W. Stapleton of this office on March 12-16, and 28, 1984, of activities at Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-67 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. W. H. Jens and members of his staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective exami-h nation of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliar.ce with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, two areas continue to concern us and we request that you advise us in. writing within thirty days of the date of this letter of the steps you have taken or intend to take to address the matter relating to the testing and maintenance of installed security related equipment (paragraph 6 of the Re tenance (paragraph 14) port Details) and the matter relating to records main-These matters were discussed during the exit interview on March 16, 1984 and during a telephone call between S. Leach of your staff and J. R. Creed of my staff on March 28, 1984 Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title.10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. En:'.:: '} S AFE i.:r...a Upon sepcc.. page is Ec. m(, n1u ma <, e / 2g> (h. I,h,khiN: 0 Y. 0,n,f} l ~- i

SA:EGJARDS INFORMATi0iN Detroit Edison Company 2 APR 0 6 934 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, W.f% v L. Axelson, Chief Material and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-08(DRMSP) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ encl: IE Files NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB IE/DRP/0RFB ACRS cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. 4 a Enclosur.. : SAFEGUAES l-Upon separ;ti . 'J ' 5 page is Ce Z i -- RIII /t/ PIII Rl!}k RIII RIII Q sf1-~- .,MC .Mdeca Creed' Knop Ad. s yirvn Sta: eton/er 04/>5/84 yT/O M SAFEGUARDS iMFORMAiiCE

r., U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-08(DRMSP) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue i Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: March 12-16 and 28, 1984 i Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: January 10-13, 1984 l Type of Inspection: Anncunced, Pre-Operational Physical Protection V ffndn'+ Inspectors: T. J. hadeda Yl/9i Physical Protection Specialist Date f Y~ 6 ~5f Physical Prote ion Specialist Date L.(3C+!)hI Approved By: J. R. Creed, Chief D b.g,l Safeguards Section Date Inspection Sumary Inspection on March 12-16 and 28,1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-08[DRMSP]) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation, installation, operability of the security program, and the preoperational testing program for security-related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Managerrent; Security Program Audit; Testing and Maintenance; Physical Barriers - Protected Areas and Vital Areas; Access Control - Personnel, Fackages, and Vehicles; Cetection Aids - Protected Area and Vital Areas; General Requirements T&Q Plan; and Additional Requirements - Power Reactors. This inspection involved 77 direct ins;:ecter-heurs by two NRC ir.s;ec ors. En:..csur2 0: '" i s.giGUARCS I.',X a-" Uponseparati;r,thj p ;e is Ceco".; it'- Bun $hw&Ce 2g.

I Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the status of areas within the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items af noncompliance were identified. Two items ;f concern were identified to which the licensee is requested to respond (Sections 6 and 14). (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORf4ATION) t l ") J ='. ;,' ~ 1 ; S E s ? '.. I,,* I 3' sratica thi3 C-a s::' Cec:ntrolled

L. is 2

J f~ J^ g v v SAFIGJADS 50RVIAEON. 3 MAY 11 E4 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational inspection conducted by Mr. T. J. Madeda of this office on April 23-27, 1984, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. F. Agosti and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection, g The enclosed copy of cur inspection report identifies areas examined during the J inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective exami-nation of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with persennel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt frcm disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, t W. L. Axelsori, Chief Materials and Safeguards Branch E. closure: Irc;v:tien 0 pcrt ,0 l {.I J, Nc. SC-34:/34-C5(NMSF) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFO UATION) Enclosure contains SAFEGUARDS Ifr0 FAT:CN p //gr 22 Upcn separaticn this "/ ~ g "q' 67C S[M[ EGilAiinS INmpMmnN J nge is Cecontr:11ej

e g SAriGL AUS 1201V A" O N The Detroit Edison Company 2 pg i i g cc w/ encl: IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS IE/ES cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Comission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. { d$cr i,l

U$

h c

05/08/84 V Enclosure centains SAFE 3UAR;S INFCRMATION Upon separatien this SA EGJARJS lNFORiVAT OV2"

t .,3 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-13(DRMSP) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name': Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site, City of Monroe and Flat Rock, MI Inspection Conducted: April 21-25, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: March 12-16 and 28, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Protection AAL W/y Enspector: T. J. Madeda f 5////84-Physical Protection Specialist Date Approved By: e d, Chief' S feguards Section Date Inspection Summary Inspection on Aoril 21-25, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-13[DRMSP]) _ Areas Inspected: Included a selective review of the status of implementation, installation, operability of the security program, and the preoperational testing program for security-related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan 'and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Response, Testing, and Maintenance; and Detection Aids - Protected Area. This inspection involved 37 direct inspection-hours by one NRC inspector. Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspector determined the status of selective arear within the security program. No items of nonecm-pliance were identified. (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS :NFORMATION) S{.], 3 ((3[s c U:cn separati:n this ic:a.: N ::r'. :ThJ f'/gstsw^rsT fg.

~ e.yn,s a:n._ ' 2.790 (d) Maten_al v<* S"*a' Withhold from Public Disclowie Nucler CD$raf:or s D2troit 2000 Secenc Avert.' M IEsaE!IT !!ay 15, 1984 CF2-68542 Mr. Jaraes G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt hoad Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Fe rrai 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341

Subject:

Cetroit Edison's Response to Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-08. With this letter, we are providing the information you requested in your letter of April 6, 1964, transmitting Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-08. This inspection report describes the results of a routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. ::adeda and B. W. Stapleton at Fermi 2 during the period of March 12-16, and 26, 1984. The enclosed response describes the steps taken or intended to be taken to address the uatter relating to the testing and maintenance of installed security related equipr:.ent and the aatter relating to records maintenance. The responses are arranged to correspond to the sequence of ite:as listed in the body of your report. We trust this response will satisfactorily address your request. If you have questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Lewis P. Bregni (313) 586-5063. Sincerely, k cc: '4 r. P. M. Cyron Mr..;. C. LeYoung !r. h. C. Knop un nm.m: m. tu:r.n. r= 2.m euma V.'ithhdd f rem Pdw Do i - - flay 18 ~534 THis D 0'l'I:H U r :20: g M a e v a vo "E A ED] P -

( "' l' /Lt/can y. } JUN 21 199 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and J. R. Kniceley of this office on May 21-25, 1984, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. F. Agosti and other memoers of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and inter-views with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC vequirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, two potential deficiencies involving the design of certain portions of your system require your review. These matters are included in paragraphs 17 and 20 of the enclosed report and were discussed with S. Leach of your staff on June 12, 1984. We request you address these matters in writing within 30 days of your receipt of this letter and include the steps taken or planned to address those matters. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. Enclosure concair.s SAFEGUtRCS It;Fc g y.*; ' :7 L:pr:n.: :; '72 is CCC:r:nlind ( ., ) () // /T l 0 (? n, u v &o " M-

f ? The Detroit Edison Company 2 JUN 211!B4 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely 0 ] \\ &w W. L. Axe on, Chief Materials and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-18(DRMSP) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ encl: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. a RIII RIII RIII RIII RII AflO! ~ Opl O!!/,d k(L haceda/rr gy.pii:eley C/ee Knope Ak son 05/18/84 r Enclesure cent 31rs SACEGUA'lCS INFCT.':ATIC'i Up:n separaticn this race is Decontrolled

.p U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-18(DRMSP) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: May 21-25, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: March 12-16 and 28, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Protection k . %M-Inspectors: T. J. Ma 2 f1 Physicg tection Specialist Da'te b{SI{I J eley p hysical Protection Specialist Date Approved 8y: ed, Chief b k afeguards Section Date Inspection Summary InspectiononMay21-2b,1984(ReportNo. 50-341/84-18[DRMSP]) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation; installa-tion; operability of the security program and the preoperational testing program for security related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Management, Personnel and Response; Security Program Audit; Records and Reports; Testing and Mainten-ance, Locks, Keys and Combinations; Physical Barriers - Protected and Vital Areas; Security System Power Supply; Lighting; Assessment Aids; Access Control - Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected and Vital Areas; Alarm St:tices; Cc=Lnications; General 7,eq. TiQ Flan; Acditional Raq. - Power Er. closure centains SAFECUARCS If;FCF..'!An03 UP0'1 Separttien this PISO I D00cntro11ed N O5.20 @@@7 2pp.

Reactors; Safeguards Contingency Plan and Safeguard Information. This inspec-tion involved 72 direct inspector-hours by two NRC inspectors. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the status of the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified. (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) 1 b Inclosure centr.in: SAFEG'JARDS INF0D:ATIC1 UpCn Sercr2tien this PON is Osccc.tt:ll]d 2

55ES'J!.f.53 ll;iEY!,10; Edison Ju1y 24, 1984 EF2-69659 Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l 799 Roosevelt Road i Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

l

Reference:

Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 l l

Subject:

Detroit Edison's Response to l Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-18 l l With this letter, we are providing the information you requested in your letter of June 21, 1984, transmitting Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-18. This inspection report describes the results of a routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and l J. R. Knicely at Fermi 2 during the period of May 21-25, 1984. The enclosed response describes the steps taken or intended to be taken to address the matter relating to the design of the main personnel access facility and the matter relating i to the potential design weakness within the warehouse. The responses are arranged to correspond to the sequence of items listed in the body of your report. We trust this response will satisfactorily address your request. If you have questions concerning this matter, j please contact Mr. Lewis P. Bregni (313) 586-5083. l l Sincerely, e cc Mr. P. M. Byron / Mr. R. C. DeYoung (j Mr..,. C. en 9 (q LI ~ smcu s w n u m: um s=o n= amm um igg f 3 Im3 C0Cuil,U,7 As tic:;,Tr.:a.D .wt

[' SAFEGU/@s !,3lF0,g0N O July 30, 1984 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Mr. T. J. Madeda of this office on July 11-13, 1984 of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. W. H. Jens and other mem-bers of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective exami-nation of procedures and representative records, cbservations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, one potential deficiency involving the design of a certain portion of your security system requires your review. This matter is discussed in Section 8 of the enclosed report. We request that you address this matter in writing within 30 days of your receipt of this letter and include the steps taken or planned to address the matter. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be han-died and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Conse-quently, the enclosure to this letter, our report of this inspection, and your response to our concern identified in Section 8 of the report will not be placed in the Public Document Room. Therefore, your statement of action regarding our concern identified in Section 8 of the report should be submitted as a separate enclosure to your transmittal letter in the manner prescribed. , cure contains

JARDS INFORMATIO!!

- -tr u ien this ]

: cu. trolled Q

? \\ \\ 3 2 'jG8$6 @ 27 9 Z y ? q'!'m D W :W.7' >>u-t-

SA IGJARDS 1NFORMK10N July 30, 1984 Detroit Edison Company 2 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concern ng this inspection. [ ' ~ Sincerely, / /.. - %g W. L. Axelson, Ch ef I Chief, Nuclear ~Ma erials Safety and Safeguards, ranch ]

Enclosure:

Inspection Report ~ No. 50-341/84-26(DRSS) } (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enc 1: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer i P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/ORPB 1 IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS 4 j cc w/ enc 1, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION j DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIOS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan l Public Service Commission j Harry H. Voigt, Esq. i t j i t i a j f i l 'l R:!I' p l R:I@Iae R:!I 9:' Axe'dn)t* (lIh h (EQ Jf/gk Madeda/rr o Cr'ead kO 07/so/84 f1/W8y i .n)s.Acermns ( 9T

. vins 1,n r.r.m,.

.. m tion this 1 .- 8 '.i I

f .q U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-26(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plsnt Site and Corporate Headquarters Inspection Conducted: July 11-13, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: May 21-25, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Protection 9E-D (to Inspectors: T, J. Madeda )Y Physical Protection Specialist Date Approved By* #. R. Cr

c. Chief 7f3c/84 J

Physical Security Section Date y spection Summary Inspection en July 11-13, 1984 (Recort No. 50-341/84-26[0RSS]) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of installation, implementa-tion, and operability of the security program and the preoperational testing program for security related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Imp 1,ementing Procedures; Testing and Maintenance; and General Requirements - T&Q Plan. This inspection involved 23 direct inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.' Fifteen of the 23 hours were onsite. The remaining 8 hours were spent in-office reviewing security procedures. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Resul_ts: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspector determined the j status of the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified; however, one poten-tial weskness with the licensee's vital area access control system was identi-fied. ) i (DET Ali.5: ChCLASSIFIE0 SAFEGUARDS IhFORMATION) ' sure contains -EUARC3 I'.FCMtATICM a separatien this u is Decertrc11d ,g/q

Y~~'Y /tJW+ 7,":." t, W .,..,..w. s Detroit

c..., m.... _,.

On 7n;Jr

August 30, 1984 EF2-69,702 Mr. James G.

Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 /

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341

Subject:

Detroit Edison's Response to Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-26 With this letter, we are providing the information you requested in your letter of July 30, 1984 transmitting Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-26. This inspection report describes the results of a routine pre-operational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. J.R. Creed and T.J. Madeda at Fermi 2 during the period of July 11-13, 1984. The enclosed response describes the steps taken or intended to be taken to address your concern regarding the design of a portion of our security equipment. We trust this response will satisfactorily address your request. If you have questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Lewis P. Bregni (313) 586-5083. Sincerely, gh(Ifo p cc Mr. p. M. Byron WHEfl SEPARATED FR t ENCLOSURES. HANDLE Mr. R. C. Knop THIS DOCUMENT AS DECONTROLLED Mr. T. J. Madeda <~ wem f AUG13 '2e _ n _,1 n n, n 1-D -{ w .Lv L 5 to=J. f

i. l .I l om 'A. gs ti g m\\. 8.Is u m r: corm.T;nsI s i l's u..l i e ; b I i 6 3 g-s SEP 0C Loi Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refors to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and J. L. Belanger of this office on August 20-24, 1984, and Mr. B. W. Stapleton of this office on August 27-29, 1984, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. S. H. Leach and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined v during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, obser-vations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. / q C 'It.... I 'h? ? ? $$ b

,~, _y > + - n.=. * - t ;

r..--
.s.

r.. 1 UI W LGUlii W. O U W D. u.:r ; i. s.Y.. ; s. .~ The Detroit Edison C mpany s[p (51984 .,~ g y, +.,, , s '. p. a s,p - We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning thistinspection. Sincerely, \\ is ,fs N '. . W. Lt Axelson,bChief NucleartMaterials Safety and 7, ~: Sa'figd3rds Branch. ,.. ws m 3.,,

Enclosure:

Inspection'Re~ ort e~' p No. 50-341/84-34(DRSS) s f' (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) .f ' ,s cc w/ encl: "c L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate s} Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB IE/ES \\ E U NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS ^ cc w/ enc 1, w/o UNCLASSIFIE0 r SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) C., ' . Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. ~ i i,,-- 1 ; 1;:ct,mTIO3 'i.:

tien this

[(4 is (;;:ntrolled 7 RIII RI i RI 3 UV-RIII RIII .f mg L - go. a,, a r Madeda p lelanger ". t ap l e tor. , Creed Knop A on 09/18/84 jfr% /, ',,,,

m...

i f = U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-34(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue 1 Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site and Offsite Weapons Firing Range Inspection Conducted: August 20-24 and 27-29, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: July 11-13, 1984 4 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Security '/. . k&d/~ Inspectors: T. J. da 9//4/9.; Physical Security Inspector Date ' L. Bel n f-M Med e. Physical Security Inspector Date .' W. St pletoh.tfn / 9 -/f' I, Physical Security Inspector Date h l'W. R. Creed, Chief {' d'-/ ?-M Approved By 7: Physical Security Section Date Inspection Summary j Inspection on August 2'0-24 and 27-29, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-34[DRSS]) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation; installa-tion; operabilit'y of the security program and the preoperational testing pro-gram for security related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Management, Personnel and Response; Security Program Audit; Records and Reports; Testing and Maintenance, Locks, Keys, and Combinations; Physical Barriers - Protected and Vital Areas; Security System Power Supply; Lighting; Assessment Aids; Access Control - Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected and Vital Aress; Alarm Stations; Ccm unications; and General ?,equirements T&Q t:-e;--; Mir.3 h,M 70'T,U!C3 M"'t- - ion this ppi: L r r. trolled t h,w,', Ym Z(?f), 1 A D 4' &

b Plan. This inspection involved 91 ' direct inspector-hours by three NRC inspec-tors. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the status of the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified. } (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) 4 I 0

)

i, 4. i. e 1 3 e 4 e l J i 1 i

.," ** ((*

4. 'e l.i '- ~ '"F ;. ' T *. C'[ " - r,., :, * 'c. i s 'g_~,::$ !;i ;;;c eciled p', 2

. g-[- .i e e pW p SAEGJARDS IFORMATiON 00T11 E84 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTH: Wayne H. Jens Vice President-Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine safeguards inspection conducted by Mr. T. J. Madeda of this office on September 24-26, 1984 of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. S. H. Leach and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during Cq. the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, the inspector did express concern regarding Your your attempt to implement the access control program and the results. attention is drawn to Sections 4 and 5 of the enclosed report. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. e} f C Encicsure c ntains h SAFEGUARDS INFCRMATICN \\ Upcn separ tion this page is Decentrolled t Q c m.v i r. n n n U 1, mc.r- -'c g m m e, v,

SAEGUARDS IN?0RMATiON t 1 The Detroit Edison Company 2 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, (, W. 't.. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-42(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ encl: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Coramission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Enclosure contains SAFEGUARDS ItiFORMATION Upon separation this Fys is Cecontrollei RIII RIII RIII RIII RRb(/ I' 7 'A %ts W AN1 son Madeda/np CrCed Knop 10/10/84 iclp{pf etc.n: ~.Tuw

it U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-42(DRSS) . Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: September 24-26, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: August 20-24 and 27-29, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-Operational Physical Security Q.l DEM Yrij<a /c//e//y Inspector: T. J. Madeda

Physical Security Inspector 9

M it 4: /e //"/?'/ V J. LR. Creed, CMief Approved By: Physical Security Section Inspection Summary Inspection on September 24-26, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-42[DRSS]) Reviewed the circumstances concerning the failure of the Areas Inspected: access control system and licensee's corrective action along with status of licensee action on previous inspecticn findings. The inspection involved 19 direct inspector-hours by one NRC inspector. The inspection was begun during the day shift. No items of noncompliance were noted. However, a weakness with the Results: licensee employee security training program was identified. a { Encicsure ccntains SAFi.GUACS INFCRMAT!C.'l Upon separation this page is Decontrolled Dtl r n !/MDf f-Ci i M " V 4 # U L-

e

.( 1 i SAFEG1 AR)S FNV TLO\\ DEC 05 E34 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda, J. R. Kniceley, and G. L. Pirtle of this office on October 29 through November 2, 1984, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. F. Agosti and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. ] The enclosed ccpy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the J inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective exami-nation of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, the inspectors did express a serious concern regarding your unsuccessful attempts to implement the computerized access control program and intrusion alarm system. This situation warrants senior management attention because it could impact our recommendation for license issuance. Your attention is drawn to Section 21 of the enclosed report. In addition, several observations concerning management of the security program are identified in Section 5 of the enclosed report for your review and evaluation. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, the enclosure to this letter and our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. E0 bub c-er,p. SAFErg;MS INFchl7q mJ U *n Separe:Icn This P f*S* IS Decantrol10d SfEGUARDS INFORMATiGN f,,) lo; ^ ~, mme 2

SAFEGLAR)S TORVATION Detroit Edison Company 2 DEC 0 5 $04 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, A. Hind, Director 4divisionofRadiationSafetyand Safeguards

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-51(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ encl: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ enc 1, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMS/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident-Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. RIII RIII P!II RIII [ P. I I I, RIII Kr l ! lhl, fO QW T r ;i, '!ki cyrod Jtind Axe'if./ / L[t//i'En le:ure car.tains Madeda/rr 4 ed ' to'p t, 11/23/84 $ArEGUARDS 1.NFCRMATICS SAFEGUARDS N~0RMAliON g;;in;nn"an

9 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-51(DRSS) License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: October 29 through November 2, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: September 24-26, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Pre-eperational Physical Security Inspectors: A %4d /2/v/F'; T. J./Mj'deda Ddte' Physical Security Inspector

k. k-IM S II J. R. Kniceleyd Date Physical Security Inspector h

k

1. L. P.irtle Date Thysical Security Inspector

\\ Approved By: // '[ff[ JjR. Creed, Chief Date Physical Security Section Er. clos u re Conta;as SAFEGUAc.9S !HF05.MATl0K Upon Separaticn Tnis D u 17 l mme n PC.Sc Is D rwr. trolled 1 o t +w1 ws 4 l 2 i

4' 's I Inspection Summary Inspection on October 29 through November 2, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-51(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation; installa-tion; operability of the security program; and the preoperational testing pro-gram for security related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Management, Personnel, and Response; Security Program Audit, Records and Reports, Testing and Maintenance; Locks, Keys and Combinations; Physical Barriers - Protected and Vital Areas; Lighting; Assessment Aids; Access Control - Personnel, Pack-ages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected and Vital Areas; Alarm Stations; Communications; General Requirements T&Q Plan; Additional T&Q Plan Requirements for Power Reactors; and Safeguards Contingency Plan. This inspection involved 103 direct inspector-hours by three NRC inspectors. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the status of the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified. (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) 6 Enclosure contains SAFEGUA: IDS :,F;;y,m q.; U n geparitien sti; P EESE I0 C6CCT.trclisd l \\

p. m. w__ ,'. y Ahw JAN 02 Es5 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda, J. R. Kniceley, and G. L. Pirtle of this office on November 26-30 and December 10-14, 1984, of activities at Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. S. H. Leach and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. However, the inspection did note a serious concern regarding your unsuccessful attempts to adequately reduce the intrusion alarm rate. This situation warrants senior management attention because it could adversely impact our recommendation for license issuance. Your attention is drawn to Sections 2 and 19 of the enclosed report. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our repo.rt of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. 0 Enclost-e contains SAFEGUARDS INFCU ATION Upon separation this rgy}n I 'r a,j page is Decontrolled Q A (( il ' hiibD' 'li'ilNC A7 A IMY l V1,1 VrG L C C n i ny p u J U/ M w a

{; MJESUAKUd Irdunmniivn The Detroit Edison Company 2 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, W L. Axel n, Chief Nuclear Ma erials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-60(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enc 1: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/ORPB IE/ES NHSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ encl, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. 4 RI RIII RITI III RIII RIII ,If

$5 C$

(* p:r&J .M son J laceca/rr Kr.i cel ey P1rtle ed Knop t/%:/M tr. closure contains s / s./ M SAFEGUARDS INFCFJGTWI ?d iAiiUll p;a:en se;:aration thisge is ,....c..- U h[lh.,]fi { ij';i-

~ U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-60(DRSS) License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: November 26-30, and December 10-14, 1984 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: October 29 through November 2, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Preoperational Physical Security Inspectors: b.$. b e/2(% 6 }@T.J.Madeda Date Physical Security Inspector

s. it. %

sl>frs J. R. Kniceley Date Physical Security Inspector b.i. A 0' il 2) % St_ G. L. Pirtle Date Physical Security Inspector Approved By: [} R. Crhed, Chief Ddte yhysical Security Section E7CICSure Certains SAFEGUARCS I,;FCRMAT 0,'{ U;;cn separation tnis page is Dacontrclied i D ~ Om p qm

1... P Inspection Summary Inspection on November 26-30, and December 10-14, 1984 (Report No. 50-341/84-60(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation, installation, operability of the security program, and the preoperational testing program for security related equipment. Specifically, the inspection covered: Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Security Organization - Management, Personnel, and Response; Security Program Audit; Records and Reports; Testing and Maintenance; Locks, Keys and Combinations; Physical Barriers - Protected and Vital Areas; Assessment Aids; Access Control - Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected and Vital Areas; Alarm Stations; Communications; General Requirements T&Q Plan; and Additional T&Q Plan Requirements for Power Reactors. This inspection involved 169 direct inspector-hours by three NRC inspectors. The inspectinn was begun during the day shift. Results: Based on the preoperational inspection, the inspectors determined the status of the security program and identified areas that must be completed prior to fuel load. No items of noncompliance were identified. (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION)

b. closure c:rlains SAFEGUARDS INFCRMATICM Upcn separation this page is Dec ntrciled 2

p" SAFEG_ ADS 3 208AT!3 u- ~ ~ JAN11 TJJ5 ~ Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine preoperational safeguards inspection conducted by Mr. G. L. Pirtle of this office on December 27, 1984 and January 3, 1985, of activities at Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87, and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. 5. H. Leach and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. ) The enclosed ccpy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Sections 2.b and d of the Report Details identified two commitments to be implemented upon issuance of an operating license. Please advise us if our understanding of the commitments is incorrect. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. L :le;ure contains !'UJARDS INFOst; TION ' m:raticn thir, 3) L: :% tic))&d n } C p u, r / zy. F GUARDS AF0WAT!ON SA m

SAFEGjARDS NFORMAIJ Detroit Edison Company 2 JAN 11 E55 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, N v L. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/84-67(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ encl: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DQASIP/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS Resident Inspector, RIII cc w/ enc 1, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt. Esq. 4 RIII RI!! RIII RIII r./ RIII M Q' .p.g .'iff li ' y_{$ %(d,p tTe/bl deda freed Knop A-$on 10/85 y Enclosure certains SAFEGUARDS IiFO:.MATIC SAFEGUARJS N20RB! Ail 0N M;EnnMan'l

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/84-67(DRSS) License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, t!I 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: December 27, 1984 at Region III Office January 3, 1985 Onsite Date of Previous Physical Security Inspection: November 26-30 and December 10-14, 1984 Type of Inspection: Announced, Preoperational Physical Security Inspector: /# 8I (% Pirtle Date Physical Security Inspector I!I'[8f Approved By: y R. Creed, Chief Date' Yhysical Security Section Inspection Summary l Inspection on December.27, 1984 and January 3, 1985 (Report No. 50-341/84-67 l (DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the status of implementation, installa-tion, and operability of the security program. Specifically, the inspection covered Alarm Station Operations and a status review of security program related commitments made by the licensee. This inspection involved ten hours by one NRC inspector. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Results: All security-related findings, commitments, and inspection modules are considered closed for the preoperational inspection effort. No items of noncompliance were noted. (DETAILS: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) En:10:cra c:rtr. ins l Sf7ECW.C5 IP. CA:iATICS UpOn Ct;'r".Ii!" this E' ~ 2 I ; = r'* H u - h uo<C2 [f ~

= s i -,.. c; ,.m.;.y;. ..i.. - .s p. .+' F,_.- .v. /n' 2 i,.* - a..s, x< b ,.-,(.} e, 5 ,I, %,* (, s ',,m._,;:.n, *e :,,. ,.,~:.,,.. g .^ 4 5 'd ? g ,,.., b-r s g k,' c. .,.s,,c n:f -' s g .cr', 4 e s ga s ga "g6 ,,,4 e C s* e b + k e 4 4 e 3 f 'I * ' "~ . s"4 m n 4 e p_ g ~ %^ ~ 4 v+ ,*r b' { w r t T d P / a. .,+

w. % g m eis".r.'w.S b6g?im%.m ham-W.h' ant %kau.$f, e..

g,, 4L6-.,as a 4. a se4 e eM ..kJ4.M..--.. e hM 8 i OP (r%, O 3 l I i a o '9=-

=.p=,e'.

=.. - - g... \\ .D - s 'k 'a* 4 ?$ % % 1 vye - _ p's '. -+t,.'.'*- s-t-,...p-. ,a 3 ,ws .2 q.'g" ,.e.

7. @~ ^,,.-.,

n '.+.,, ....p. ._~ g. 4 F C J 9 1 M a 9 w 2 A '_+ ^ y y 'T' 5. Q). a g .,- ~* -m s

% C3 i *

4 m_" b i..* r, 4s

-. a '. %$ - 7 3 ,-s-- S* f* #^ ^ '.,f e ' ~ Ee ng.'*C . '. g#4 , o-.4 g + k k

s.. k-= J'-v,,,r

,As, = 1 3-g y s,s..".j,.r'. g g y b a gs, b j, 86 g og 6 S M s .m 6 sl p"/,,. a y 1 pg .6 9 % ,'y !

g y

-J

9 0

0 k

g... d 9 e e &J M.*- 1, * *: l Can t,'. %m... w n.< pu ~ - v.: (:f s' ?:~ f l ninn-T* 4/WC /* 4r0 ~ (2 ;p.,,, n a $j 3 J. & g /l1pi t,. ~~ t pg,*fse,,p.MV f } r~.e), w -- /~c.

q s

/ . m t s " "A l o'*=**'o**6 Y *JT,pe,. o'n e.e~ * ; $ ' h'af A

L' y a ' ?jn l

t M /s & D# b* I ag, h% $[sr [ [k ( g* 8w V ej d * *

fe j h N

6. W, $ G.

f : J ' r. 3. fI7 f's.[C, /a G.. tw j fe e.' e <: '..

s p.

wy a.. t '.' f'. ! y? - W4 ,r -y. ='. n* ' ' l E "& P i f ' -~~.-- ~~ [ );,'*: " <~ f. , ;* a - C7,C. ' -- ~ ~ /x -.. _x >'Te #,., ~ m* * -Y ~ j*1,:. / 74.i-cg,., y,. J.',r s, o p-

,: r jm. > &

g f W^^ =g 4,-) w o j ...cm r~a : O ~ c. 1 a,*;U$,*

f

~~.. f. Q em l ee{.._ ~- ~

I j

p g 4 d jf a ^. f.m ~ * ~ ~.. -. f e= ml-J,=- ., p,w / /s ,Q tsp e b H4 A go

Q g*' *

- 3 %d d /- e, e \\ f. 4 f

.D G K t'i c. /e M/ . - - a. ~ : e~ .4 y s. i p,es ' g '\\- 'WI I S[w p,

t.,

r ~ A<f7,I/~ -. //f/ l g r *(* / - _t g.., 3- ~ / t.* p;=e /* ~ g * *- ~ = o 4 i

t NRC INSPII70R'S DEPAIG/D2T MEZmE tj y7 Th: /g 3g Place: (TdC j Date: m.2 Tmz oncwazmm - A

A e.

e c~ - 51,- i, ~ < t i ce nr il,c. { -n T D& $ Sum,.n - %ua-tk fd W& A.,1., n..:4 &.d A A.- % c. 4 a Vce?.NtdRT7is Ds T? lboaAnot Klastu 7 howr+) N Os.Ca k % e.hh Am%\\ 9 $1% vu of $dd' %W-sks-Me7?M-Seu w -M Sm.ax eLb & s~ u e l2&), W / .Dir-kue $c u., e s s c.-- -0 l. S / Gev Dit //. 6 C. AA 0. S. T4 ca.d //sfr: 4:.e.. < x Nvs - s ec.c.'n - !:, = v _/7/Eih Rcsacb E4 n b AlR L ./ n -CCC9 Tart _ p_ Puysiens_Ste. lo se U R c_. EEcs ted E r.'J.v u o %,toA Puss cat. Ste.. lu n e M tc-Recseoatr i N E 2,W cfiA@- dh94ff di!GW. ~

t NRC INSPEC'IOR'S ENTPANCE/ EXIT NK; p7 Time: /g 3g Place: CT4C.j Date: t NMZ TITLE ORGANIZATION * < T d, 00nen Ehe in.g e $ ice nri,' e. T R /Wnks CNs-w %Mr$ d~W *f'ch itL < /~ %. :L CL-d A A.- %,, h LO-). \\&w),ds /JGP [ bon &bnet KlatWe hoeurs m.%. CusAAx %9g.b& n%%3 x W A4(AA d $6'd %@h-A/ss-/MR & Sa gbY A s elb u sa-:n 2&) & Ar N'u e 5c uoe s e c-- 0 L RnaA Gsv DL Al. d C. 4/ 0. S. .x,,,s 2 -7L,,en. s its17: ~M. - cx Nus - s ac auy M &~ Ord m RcsA M 4 AIR C, / G. L. 9 tittte PMysient.Ste. lo se u ec.RaicaE r,a. mnetoA Pws cat. Ste, lo s e u c c.- R w o u w F SMM'.27Y diam-d)9ss A!GA. 1 2 e f N 4 1

3.,.7.. w.] g-SAFEGJARJS NF0EATT:i r~m V APR 041985 i Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the reactive safeguards inspection conducted by Mr. T. J. Madeda of this office on March 6-8, 1985, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by HRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-87 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr; S. H. Leach and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective ]' examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules, of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. Thir, informa-tion must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. OA l I jb Enclosure cor. ains 57JEGUAP S I::FCEATIC:: ,fm[ p 2.- 9. Upcn separaticn tnis p*;e is Cecentrolisd su 4 w p. Pr n ' 4,,. $. n n... - -- -. MSI@ I5 - I' i VI\\ tort !., .1

(- ~ SAFEG_ ADS F0lMAliOB! The Detroit Edison Company 2 APR 041985 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inshection. Sincerely, c fl k #fo ~ s Willica L. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/65018(DRSS) cc w/ enc 1: L. P. Bregli, licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DCAS!P/ORPS IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/encls, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATI0h: DMB/ Document Control Desk (R!DS) Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Com.nission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section i RIII RIII RII: R RIII RI!I '-

~ fjV-' 'ilYU QYls h)>il

$pT:?y $b*Yn ju ~ v ~- .~ ---

7. Q:. ;[ -. _'

r"- u Wil1et halsca Madeda/ld Cfeen h cp c 03/18/85 i' 'i /N 'd{$$ d/yl[W /- (( "' } 3 O n r n t f *, D iW l In 5 D ?

1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III i Report No. 50-341/85018(DRSS) License No. CPPR-87 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue. Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: March 6,-8, 1985 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: January 3, 1985 Type of Inspection: Announced, Special Physical Security Inspectors: A rJde 3/P6 ~ T. J @deda Date Phy c51 Security Inspector Y O Approved By: a / j0/ R. Cresid, Chief Date LFhysical Security Section Inspection Summary Inspection on March 6-8, 1985 (Report No. 50-341/85018(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a review of licensee action in the followup and investigation of several allegations relating to the licensee's background screening program for personnel cllowed unescorted access. In addition, one allegation relating to the licimsee's vehicle control program was reviewed. This inspection i~nvolyed 16 hours by one NRC inspector. The inspection was began during the day shift. l Results: The licens.ee's followup and investigation and resulting actions were in agreement with approved security plen commitments as it relates to the licensee's screening program. The one allegation relating to the licensee's vehicle access control program was not sut,stantiated. No items of noncompli-nnce were noted. (Detafis - UNCLASSISIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) w SAFEGUARE5 INF0E'. ATE l; U ND CC N ration this Q^Abirr QM I-fe.. ~-~ iv p g is Occ;r. trolled

&n_ s, w SA IG AUS F01VA~ 0l\\ APil 11 E85 Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166

Dear Mr. Jens:

This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated March 21, 1985, which transmitted chcnges, identified as Amendment 6, to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan," under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p). We have reviewed the submitted changes and have determined that they are not consistent with the provisions cf 10 CFR 50.54(p) and must be revised before they can be determined to be acceptable. For the item identified as being unacceptable under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p), the previously approved plan rev.isions must be followed. Should you want to pursue changing the plan under the previsions of 10 CFR 50.54(p), you must resubmit the changes modified to address our comments. In those instances where you desire to pursue the changes without modification, they r;;ust be resubmitted undar the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90. The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter cffect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, CMB clearance is not ree,uired under P. L. 95-511. The enclosures to your letter contain Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and are being withheld from public disclosure. I A R s4 n :c. m... !.ARDu F, m ORMF.. ON, R m,,- 7%

SAi tG JAR)S 1:0RV A"'ON Mr. Wayne M. Jens 2 APR 11 Lea 5 The enclosure to this letter also contains Safeguards Information and should be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Sincerely, i W. L. xe son, ief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

Comments (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/o encl: See Attached List bec w/ encl: (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) NMSS/SGPR NRR/SSPB Enclosure Cc. ': Ins SG Case File: 0500034108WA SAF;GL7,7.00 I P r '

T I ON SG Inspector File:

Madeda Upon SepLrstien This SG Reviewer File: Page is Decoritrolled NRR Docket File RIII RIII RIII RIII NW C (, Kn$ct' Ah}.t& \\ i Ke 6/jl d Bdon op 4/10/85 V I SA iGLARJS NF0hiATON

~ FERMI UNIT 2 Mr. Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 cc: Mr. Harry H. Voight, Esq. Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Division of Licensing 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Peter A. Marquardt, Esq. Co-Counsel The Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Mr. William J. Fahrner Project Manager - Fermi 2 The Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 John Minock, Esq. 1500 Buhl Building Detroit, MI 48226 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fermi Nuclear Power Plant 6450 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Ronald C. Callen Adv. Planning Review Section Michigan Public Service Commission 6545 Merchantile Way P. O. Box 30221 Lansing, MI 48909 Mr. Larry E. Schuerman The Detroit Edison Company 3331 West Big Beaver Road Troy, MI 48084

I [p:XJt Gv, %, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COk.MisslON L UNITED STATES ~ f '., e. i REGION 111 "r . ? I 719 ROCSE VEL T RO AD 0, GLEN ELLYN. ILLINots 50137 e MAY 14 G..-ob Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Compar.y ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This confirms our plans as ciscussed on May 10, 1985, between Mr. S. Leach of your staff and Mr. T. Madeda of this office to have a meeting with you and members of your staff at 1:00 p.m. (CDT) on May 21, 1985, at the U. S. huclear Regulatory Comissi.on's Regior, III of rice in Glen Ellyn, Illinois. The purpose of the' meeting will be to discuss the security event that recently occurred at your Fermi 2 facility. We will gladly discuss any questions you may have concerning this matter. Sincerely, a r l ::' ). A. Hind, Director ' Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards cc: L. F. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corocrate Legal Department DMB/Decument Control Desk (RIDS) Resident Inspector, Riil Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section .O esam ces 7

p I' g 4 Gg, UNITED STATES f \\ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON [ REGION lil .p g 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD

6 b 't,
g 8,

f CLEN ELLYN, ILLINOl$ 60137 "%..... J gi)..,,- NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT LICENSEE MEETING Name of Licensee: The Detroit Edison Company Name of Facility: Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant Docket No.: 50-341 Date and Time of Meeting: May 21, 1985 at 1:00 p.m. (CDT) location of Meeting: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III Office 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Purpose of Meeting: Enforcement Conference to discuss the security event that recently occurred at the Fenni 2 facility. Region III Attendees: J. G. Keppler, Regicnal Administrator, J. A. Hind, Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards, J. R. Creed. Chief, Physical Security Section N. J. Chrissctires, Chief, Projects Section ID S. Stasek, Project Inspector, Fermi 2 (4.L.Belanger,SafeguardsSpecialist Licensee Attendees: F. Agosti, Manager of Nuclear Operations Others as designated NOTE: Attendance by NRC personnel at this meetite should be made known tc S. Stasek via telephone call (FTS 388 E'0!j by C03 May 20, 1985. Distribution: J. M. Taylor, Director, Office of Inspeed.sn c:.. inforcement E. L. Jordan, Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response, IE J. G. Partlow, Director, Division of Inspection Programs B. K. Grimes, Director, Division of Quality Assurance, Vendor and Technical Training Center Programs J. A. Axelrad, Director, Enforcement Staff, IE J. Liebercan, Director and Chief Counsel, Regional Operations and Enforcerent Division, ELD H. L. Thompsen, Jr., Director, Division of Licensing W. Erach, Em; ive C crdirat r for Redcral C:crati:rs, DE:FOGP D. Lynch, Licensing Frcject."arager, Di-M.

4 a 'I .'..n, Azlek l dit[~2 - ' ! [, r. N Q I M - r : ? * ' ' ' ' ? M O$ ," Q d.L M !isl~.. w.;;i.ae' h JUN 0 51985 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the special inspection conducted by Mr. J. L. Belanger of this office on May 1-2, 1985, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-33, and to the discussion of our findings with you and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection on May 2, 1985 and during the Enforcement Conference held in Region III on May 21, 1985. The special inspection was conducted regarding an event documented in your a Safeguards Event Report dated April 26, 1985, which had been telephonically d reported by the Assistant Director, Nuclear Security on April 23, 1985. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies the items examined during the inspection which consisted of an examination of security force records, observations, and interviews with personnel. During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in noncompliance with NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Appendix. A written response is required. The violation described in the Appendix to this letter represents a breakdown in your security system. We view this breakdown as significant and considered classifying it as a Severity Level III violation; however, this particular violation is more appropriately classified at Severity Level IV due to the status of the plant at the time of the event. For the future, as we discussed at the May 21, 1985 conference, generally, civil penalties are considered for Severity Level III violations, and may be imposed for Severity Level IV violations that are similar to previous violations for which the licensee did not take effective corrective action. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, the encicsure to this letter, our report of this irspec; ion, 2nd y:ur rs3?:rse to the ncrce :lia ce icantified in the /' (/ ,.c OnclC;Jr? to this I3tter Nill nct be pl2C2c in the Public CCce ent ho9. j'j / ,._,.7.._,, .y m. jj. 5 'I U liedal' k 4

w I UpOn SEp!.rctiCS t'iS

,m,pn,4-h,>f< pT ','e 12 D0 c ;~.t ' c I l 0 i ,,,f S c O w w ( if'

Q r.- ~ ~ < t r-n ~ ~ v e e- .e p sl[U I U rii["C d liijG 6.h a$ il' d ii The Detroit Edison Company 2 M EE Therefore, your statement of corrective action regarding the noncompliance identified in the enclosure should be submitted as a separate enclosure to your transmittal letter in the mann r prescribed. We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, / tl / chn A. Hind, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

1. Appendix, Notice of Violation 2. Inspection Report No. 50-341/85012(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosures: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department Resident Inspector, RIII IE File IE/DQASIP/ORPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS cc w/ enc 1, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control De.sk (RIDS) Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section W d \\ .W ,\\ ~ RIII 'EM RIII N RIII RIII Ld RI h. RIII s er wue Selangh-p /ld kadada CFsec .e x-y Chr}ssetimes [f/ p f EnclosuretfPM'~3 Schu t: Stapleton it;nd r i 06/04/85 0 '..;p ? ! A n ,0 l i.i z '.'.'. ';,'i i ~.. SAFEGUARCS Iijf f Z ::'i c;u L A :u.: d ii.i v.- t. {j

9 d U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/85023(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-33 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: May 1-2, 1985 Enforcement Conference Conducted: May 21, 1985 Enforcement Conference At: U.S. NRC Region III Office, Glen Ellyn, IL Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: March 6-8, 1985 Type of Inspection: Announced, Special Physical Security y.c y Inspecter: J. L. Belan er df/W Date C).f.Gl.) V J. R. Cree, Chief d# Reviewed By: Safeguards Section Date Approved By: x s f d 8f Nuclear Materials Safety Date and Safeguards Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on May 1-2, 1985 (Recort No. 50-341/85023(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a review of the events described in a licensee Safeguards Event Report dated April 23, 1985, and corrective actions taken. This inspection involved 22 hours, on site and in-office, by one NRC inspecter. The inspection was begun during the day shift. Results: Based on this inspection, one apparent item of noncompliance was ident1fied. Acces Cent cis - Oersonnel: Licensea faiisd t0 adecuataly centrei or meniter access to a vital area as a result of failing to ace:;uately respond to a vital area alarm. (Paragraph 3) (Details - UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGL'ARDS INFORMATION) Enclosure c:St ai r.S SAFEGUARDS INFCM AI _", _n ov e - -., O W EA v ((X(/ [6 Upen Se;3"at10,1 th "3 o m :ntrc:,,o,

W;yne H. Jens V Vee Prwoent ggg gg Nucier Opeettens t o-tn 0 a.e H paa. Neapon. nens,. e e July 3, 1985 C "lSOr I pipi50 _Q NE-85-0398 Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-33

Subject:

Detroit Edison Response Inspection Report 50-341/85023 This letter responds to the item of noncompliance described in your Inspection Report No. 50-341/85023. This inspection was conducted by Mr. J. L. Belanger of NRC Region III on May 1 and 2, 1985. The item of noncompliance is discussed in this reply as required bf Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2, Title 10, Code cf Federal Regulations. We trust this letter satisfactorily responds to the non-compliance cited in the inspection report. If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Lewis Bregni, (313) 586-5083. Sincerely, \\ cc: (*with attachment) P. M.' Byron

N. J. Chrissotimos J.

R. Creed

USNRC, Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.

20555 /g i <,.. : c C .,p5lqs f) c( g( ?,Ari.EAE '.FE!ATM x -- , -.. a j. g : ~~ ) WHEN SEPARATED FROM ENCLOSURES, HANDLE THIS DOCUMENT AS DECONTROLLED.

o . ej de[cax_ e.,cs.. Mis MORhMTiG ) JUL 12ISE Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This refers to the routine safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and J. L. Belanger of this office on June 10-14, 1985, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-33, and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. E. P. Griffing, and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during O the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and v interviews with personnel. During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in non-compliance with NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Appendix. A written response is required. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accor' dance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consequently, the enclosure to this letter, our report of this inspection, and your response to the noncompliance identified in the enclosure to this letter will not be placed in the Public Document Room. Therefore, your statement of corrective action regarding the noncompliance identified in the encJosure should be submitted as a separate enclosure to your transmittal letter in the manner prescribed. The responses directed by this letter (and the accompanying Notice) are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. r.cicsure centains Gygg3;.0315FCFTAIIC3 Upcnscpcraticnthis ^ page is CecentrcH ed i C / r 1.m! 2pp. u - i n; - s o--

h,', hf L The Detroit Edison Company 2 JUL 12 E We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, n a L. Axe son, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosures:

1. Appendix, Notice of Violation 2. Inspection Report No. 50-341/85030(DR55) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosures: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE Files IE/DQASIP/ORPE IE/E5 NM55/5GPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS Resident Inspector, RIII cc w/ enclosures w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and, Environmental Monitoring Section ... icsure contains E "EGUARCS INFORMATION L) n separation this page is Decontrolled RIII R, I RJ{I%g RIII RIII RIII (JlL- )Ib t,;Q.9' : ange r Cieed C Yi's sotime s Weil AI a M,teca/jp l%7 10/85 [' \\,l O'~~~'"~'*" o tq'i& dds kti(L,*,_ ~p. :~,u m e ~, b-i ... ~. ) l i ~

i U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/85030(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. DPF-33 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2200 Second / venue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: June 10-14, 1985 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: May 1-2, 1985 Type of Inspection: Unannounced, Routine Physical Security "!W Inspectors: .J d da .jsical Security Inspector Date i nger ) physical Security Inspector Date Ykf85 Approved By: R. Cre d, Chief Safeguards Section Date Xnspection Summary: 2nspection en June 10-14, 1985 (Report No. 50-341/85030(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included a selective review of Management Effectiveness; Security Organization, Testing and Maintenance; Physical Barriers - Protected Area; Physical Barrierri - Vital Areas; Access Control - Personnel; Access Control - Packages; Access Control - Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected Area; Detection Aids - Vital Areas; Alarm Stations; Training and Qualification Plan; and the Safeguards Contingency Plan. Additionally, the inspection included a review of an open item identified in Inspection Report 50-341/84067. The inspection also reviewed concerns expressed by an anonymous alleger to Region III on May 13, 1985. The inspection involved 68 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors. Four of the 68 inspector-hours were conducted during t"e back-shif t periods. The insoection began i during tne caj shif*.. c 7 . a ', ". s ,, /d5 It,7CC'.ATICII

,cgaratien this p ge is Decantr0 Hod

-0 S? ?-WEff.

Results: The licensee was found to be'in compliance with NRC requirements within the areas examined, except-for the following: Detection Aids - Protected Area: Some alarm zones failed to detect simulated test penetrations. (Section 6) The alarm rate, previously identified as an open item, was found to be substantially reduced and the item was closed. The concerns expressed from- .an anonymous alleger were not found to be substantiated. (Details - UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) t l Enclosure contains,,, 5 AFEGUARDS ItiFORPs,i - - Upon separation this 73;e is Desent"0II', 2

. /lfluac ... -h s JUL 16 E85 - Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Wayne H. Jens -Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit. Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166

Dear Mr. Jens:

This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 5, 1985, which transmitted changes, identified as Revised Amendment 6, to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan," under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p). We have reviewed the changes and have determined that they are consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p) and are therefore acceptable. The enclosures to your letter contain Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and are being withheld from public disclosure. Sincerely, l f l I William L. xe son, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch v cc: See Attached List -bec: NMSS/SGPR NRR/SSPB SG Case File: 050034102WA SG Inspector File': Madeda SG Reviewer File NRR Docket File RIII RII s RIII / RIII, Kem$\\].N0'){ c Ae% e31 Spe Knap s i een 7/15/85 i f .u l T C % l3a/'j-2(>p, ~

.4 . \\; FERMI Mr. Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI~ 48166 cci Mr. Harry H. Voight, Esq. Hugh L. Thompson, Director LeBoeuf, Lamb,-Leiby & MacRae Division of Licensing 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washingten, D.C. 20036 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Peter A. Marquardt, Esq. Co-Counsel The Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Mr. William J. Fahrner Project Manager - Fermi 2 The Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 John Minock, Esq. 1500 Buhl Building Detroit, Michigan 48226 Resident Inspector U.W. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fermi Nuclear Power Plant 6450 W. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 Ronald C. Callen Adv. Planning Review Section Michigan Public Service Commission 6545 Mercantile Way P.O. Box 30221 Lansing, Michigani 48909 Mr. Larry E. Schuerman .The Detroit Edison Company 3331 West Big Beaver Road Troy, Michigan 48084

ye, pre,. cont I W Wo#W Ib' O!IMAjl(lk h Nucles' Opers 2,$ )fO{n{ Forme.2 e40o sw ou sv.., August 9, 1985 . son 3 7 "* NE-85-0408

Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43

Subject:

Detroit Edison Response Inspection Report 50-341/85030 This letter responds to the item of noncompliance described in your Inspection Report No. 50-341/85030. This inspection was conducted by Messrs. T. J. Madeda and J. L. Belanger of NCR Region III on June 10 through 14, 1985 The item of noncompliance is discussed in this reply as required by Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. We trust this letter satisfactorily responds to the non-compliance cited in the inspection report. If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Lewis Bregni, (313) 586-5083. Sincerely, !}0( cc: (*with attachment) j P. M. Byron

J.

R. Creed

G. C.' Wright USNRd, Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.

20555 r i WHEN SEPIsRATED FPCA' ENCLCS"RES, HANDLE iiil S DOCUMENT AS DECONTROLLED. SAI[SUAE.C3 [.'.'fC5.9 Ail l,V n no a w v,c o a v-t< 3 pug 15 p..- y.

ir e i_s y .'s,4. -. +.--

.}

_,g ~s ,g 7., 'f y*j e .v p, x... n %c, 7 .,, e Cf, f.,' p' G7.. q >g-v- s '9 , <* i'*~.,. c , "yy_- '[ Y' # .-. { . 7,.,j.'2 ,-,_,- ^ ;- g+- '3.', ~ 7, ...m.,,i, ,,3,

==,z%, ". .y m. u, J .1 "?".-. -, =- ,, S ,e-,y . t - e*. p. ?yL e f, s# g 1 ' e-Q y - s - u 4

-<.',.%g, s.

< g e , F s' ,= S A O 6, e man.8-r i

y.

WS**.ehem. - - - ai 4*

6 4

DlYb$ \\f \\t360 k f f ~. } a s 1 / . j f 4 9 e W I .= 1 4

h l

1 CL 5 k n.. u 4,. .I

,4 e

} s e 1. g ,m., i 4 4 T e 4 - P p gH'De M N' es 9 fa . Y 4 " p

T je q

,.e, e t s s E f' 5 ~ = r ? %.).- i _}* a s 4, *.' ;

.f...,*.

.(. .s. % A. s r i p s ~ s= Y 4 ., - -n' ' > s r, g,,. a e,a- , y a e S*' ,5 ', *t,,, 7 p f% }f 9 y \\ -t 5-, s au s -, ~ e ' * .N. s 4 a i l

Ib Deholi Edison ^ 2.2 n ~.n

1. :

.1: = t:..- S 3 s.... - (;. Date: Septenber 9,1985 1 To: Attendees From: B. Tibai Associate Business Technician

Subject:

Behavioral Reliability Trainina You have been sche 3uled to attend' Behavioral Reliability Training on Wednesday, October 16th and on Thursday, October 17th , 1985. i This two day class will be held at the Monroe Activity Center from 0800 to 1630 hours. The Behavioral Reliability Training workshop is an integral part of the Fermi 2 ' Access Authorization Plan ard is a requirerent for supervisors of irdividua.ls who have been granted unescorted access to the protected and vital areas. The workshop was designated to accm plish several objectives: 1. Apprise supervisory personnel of their responsibilities in the Continuing Behavioral Observation Program. 2. Develop the skills necessary to recognim deterioration in an enploye's jcb prformance and changes in normal behavior sich might result in a security, safety or reliability issue. ~ Provide inforrcation abcut the appropriate actions to take ard the 3. administrative steps to follow. i Unfilled cancellations cost us twice, once for the cancellation and j once when you do go through the trainirs. If you gat cancel, please notify me (164-4023) prior to the start of the class. r j 1 If you miss the second day in this training, you nust recshedule the session within four weeks or retake both days. Thank you. Atterdees: K. Agy RrAnderson se >N. Bartman ' l L. Berg 9'~ S. Eurp ,J. Childs "' # l J. Edinger W. Dmrett W. E::wkins .r H. Higgins L. Lacey R.McLecd,e; F. Owens, Jr.d,;- J. Peteckey e%.. ' C. Plu=nr d" F. Vitale Br/klk O o r-Oc

,[* \\ f/4%<_: SEP 131995 Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Ecison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166

Dear Mr. Jens:

This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 6,1985, which transmitted changes, identified as Amendment 7, to the "Formi 2 Physical Security Plan," under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p). We have reviewed the changes and have determined that they are consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p) and are therefore acceptabic. The enclosures to your letter contain Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and arc being withhcid fro.,public disclosure. Sincerely, a W1 liam L. Axelsbn, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch cc: See Attached List bcc: NMSS/SGPR NRR/SSPB SG Case File: 050034103WA SG Inspector File: Madeda SG Reviewer File NRR Docket File RII RIII RIII R n kNpe Q.& Q 1G Kers/jl rc A> sdn ' w, q kl - 9/gp/85 P3 45"?L"wM a p. p

' E. FERMI Mr. Wayne H. Jens Vice President Nuclear.0perations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 cc: Mr. Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Ronald C. Callen LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Adv. Planning Review Section 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Michigan Public Service Commission Washington, D. C. 20036 6545 Mercantile Way P. O. Box 30221 John Flynn, Esq. Lansing, Michigan 48909 Senior Attorney The Detroit Edison Company Regional Administrator, Region III 2000 Second Avenue U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Detroit, Michigan 48226 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Mr. Dennis R. Hahn, Chief Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of Radiological Health P. O. Box 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Mr. O. Keener Earle Supervisor-Licensing The Detroit Edison Company Fermi Unit 2 6400 No. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 Mr. Paul Byron U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector's Office 6450 W. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 Monroe County Off. ice of Civil Preparedness a 963 South Raisinville Monroe, Michigan 48161

o-j.- m. .V V. an -e *. SA:EGUARDS iUORV A~ 0N e m OCT 2 41985 -) Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company l ATTN: Wayne H. Jens Vice President / Nuclear Operations 1 2 l 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 l ' Gentlemen: This refer.i to the routine safeguards inspection conducted by Messrs. T.J. Madeda and G. L. Pirtle of this office on September 30 through October 4, 1985, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-33 and to the discussion of our findings with you and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during g the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective J examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel. No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection. Commitments made to resolve concerns noted during the inspection regarding the security management program are described in Paragraph 5.a of the Report Details. Please advise us if our understanding of your actions are incorrect. Areas examined during this inspection concern a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the NRC's " Rules of Prac-tice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. l Consequently, our report of this inspection will not be placed in the Public Document Room. i d i ) h 10 ura c:nt3T.O._ S/JEG' ARDS IWCD%T!C J Upen reparatien this m aw.., SAFEGUARDS,'N.:0..RL.f.:~ C6ti" ' ' "' "* " " " " " ' ' t W [ 2.

r SAFEGtAIDS F01MA70X The Detroit Edison Company 2 OCT 2 41985 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, g.A. Hind, Director 4 Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/85044(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosure: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer ' P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department Resident Inspector, RIII IE File IE/DI/ORPE IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB ACRS i cc w/ enclosure, w/o SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DCS/RSB (RIDS) Licensing Fee Management Branch Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission i Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness RIII RITI RIII RIII PJIIJ RIII

vAS, h

kk ,. 'r 5 .h.. +D.. 9*, H n,dh T* ~. A nu s saceasi er r,,ie i n. a = i,4v/W 10,g/35 (/ tr. closure contains $l5E@;JCS IPJC8ATIC Q:n te;;raten th(s Y

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/85044(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. DPF-33 Safeguards Group IV s ~ Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2200 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Inspection At: Plant Site Inspection Conducted: September 30 through October 4, 1985 Da'te of Last Physical Security Inspection: June 10-14, 1985 Type of Inspection: Unannounced, Routine Physical Security i Inspectors: 1.1 bdQ. y T. J. Madeca DNeWA5 7 Physical Security Inspector u). L. Pirtle. 1 9 U: h.a ic/z4I 45 Date Physical Security Inspector 4 Approved By: N/84/hPf R. Creed, Chief Dite afeguards Section I l I Inspection Summary j Inspection on sentember 30 thrcuch October 4, 1985 (Report No. 50-341/85044(URSS)) i Areas Insoected: Incluaed a selective review of Management Effectiveness, 3ecurity'~0rganizatier.; Testing and Maintenance; Security Program Audit; I Compensatory Measures; Access Control - Personnel; Access Control - Packages; Alarm Stations; Training and Qualification; and the Safeguards Contincency i ~ *WWJr1 CDntb f ra i 85#DE.C5 INTWATICli ( R :n wparatien t.319 -@CJ41 j@@ j 7 gff T' 3 is Decoctit W.d r

Plan. Additionally, the inspection included a review of licensee action on previous inspection findings. Also, licensee action on two security related events (unauthorized use of security equipment and an inadequate compensatory measure) were reviewed by the inspectors. The inspection involved 70 direct inspection hours by two NRC inspectors. Results: The licensee was found to be in compliance with NRC requirements within the areas inspected. In addition, all previously identified violations and open items are closed. (Details: UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) i f 5 kf,CIC$Vrtccet3fn3 i INIGUARC#. I?7CTJU.IID' 2 " Tea cptrst fca tn!; e 7314 Cxct??I194

'"l0~h DATE: November 5, 1985 TO: G. R. Overbeck FROM: J.D. Leman

SUBJECT:

Priority of Security PN-21's Priority "1" should be given to all security PN-21's requiring " Compensatory Measures". The PN-21's requiring compensatory measures are to be marked as such. I agreed to this with Wayne Hastings, but if you have any disagreement, please advise. JDL/ jim cc: S. Booker W. Hastings R. May G. Preston s' q ,rn p d .* E *. V G) )

\\ Aku c,3 SAFEGUARDS :NFORVA~ 0Y APR 0 9198G Decket No. 50-341 Mr. Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166

Dear Mr. Agosti:

A comment concerning the commitments made in Section 1.2.2, page 1-3, Amendment 9 to the " Fermi 2 Physical Security Plan" was omitted from our letter of April 3, 1986. Therefore, the omitted comment is enclosed in this letter. The enclosure co this letter contains Safeguards Information of a type specified in 10 CFR 73.21 and should be withheld from public disclosure. Should you or your staff have any questions concerning our comments please contact Mr. D. A. Kers at (312) 790-5766 or Mr. J. R. Creed at (312) 790-5643. Sincere 6, [ i;'/ / p t'^ - W. L. Axelson, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch

Enclosure:

As stated (Unclassified Safeguards Information) cc w/o enclosure: See Attached List bec w/ enclosure: NMSS/SGRT NRR/SSPB SG Case File: 0500034105WA SG Inspector: Madeda SG Reviewer File NRR Docket File Ynclosure Contains 7 .SAFEGUARCs Inrop,sTioy boa Scn ratic., Ta b MII RI I RIII Ke jl W wr1 h Axelson ' mu Eed eht vp !McM*4>gA EGUARDS 'N 0W""'" Pr J;d)

,l,, + FERMI Docket No. 50-341 Mr. Frank E. Agosti Vice President, Nuclear Operations The Detroit Edison Company 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 1 cc: Mr. Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Ronald C. Callen LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Adv. Planning Review Section 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Michigan Public Service Commission Washington, D. C.'20036 6545 Mercantile Way P. D. Box 30221 John Flynn, Esq. Lansing, Michigan 48909 Senior Attorney The Detroit Edison Company Regional Administrator, Regien III 2000 Second Avenue U. S. Nuclear P.egulatory Commission Detroit, Michigan 48226 799 Roosevelt Road Mr. Dennis R. Hahn, Chief Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of Radiological Health

p. O. Box 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Mr. O. Keener Earle Supervisor-Licensing The Detroit Edison Company i

Fermi Unit 2 + 6400 No. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 I Mr. Paul Byron i U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector's Office 6450 W. Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166 l Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness 963 South Raisinville Monroe, Michigan 48161 o l . ~, ~.,.,. - - -,,. - -.. -.,, -,.,.--,,,,,_n..,.,n.-., -,m.~.-...,,,,,-- .--...-,----,.---,,e-. ~n..,--

7.. .9 SAWAES V0Mbl0N APR 121986 J . Docket No. 50-331 The Detroit Edison Ccmpany + ATTN: Frank E Agosti Vice fresup1t Nuclear Operations 6400 Nortn Oixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen This refers to the reactive physic.1 secu-ity inspectf t.n ccnducte 1 by Messrs. T. J. M:dt.da ard G. L. P Wtle cf this office en March 10-14 and 25, 1086, of activities at the Enrito Fer.M At'umic Power Plant, U7it 7, suthorizec' by NRC Operating License No. NpF-33 and to the discuscicn of our findings with Mr. Y. Agosti and otheo menbers of ycW staff at the conclusion of the intpection. The enclosse copy of ce* inspection recort iden':if hs arear,axemir:ed durirs the inspecticn. Within these areas, tre inspe: tion ccesisted cf a selective E] crat.ination of proceouros anc repre;entnive 'ecor:s, c.bservatiers, Ltd interviews with personnel. Durine this inspection, certatr of your ac:ivitles appetred T.c te in violat ton of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed Nc:in. A written respos:e is required. Our Lnderstanding of ycur itnted: ate :ornctive actions are described in Section 7 of the Report Details. Ole:se advise us if our understanding of ycur actient is incorre:t. Areas examined during this inspection ccncers a subject matter whi:5 ia exempt from disclosure acccrding to Part 73, Title 10, Ccde of Federsi Regular.fons, Section 73.21(c)(2). This inforcation must be hardled and prctected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.2L Consequently, the encicsure to this letter, our report of the inspection, and y o r respor.se to the violation (s) identified in the entipsure to thls ler,ter will iot be plased i ti the NRC Pcblic Document.Roem. Ther& fore, your stateu nt of corrective action regarding the violation (s) identified in the encicrwre should be stbmitted ts a separate enclosure to ycur transmittal letter -fn the manner prescribed. The responses directed by this letter and the acccmpanying Notice are r.ot subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required t:y the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1950, PL 9E-511. b :kta e e:n::'r.: ) WC;UAC3 INFMAT M l ppon separati:n this page is Dec:ntrclied L .gavnepf q. SAEGUARDS INFogxTon 9( j

r SEUARDS fiFORMAnoii The Detroit Edison Company 2 APR 11 1986 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, ) l W. L. Ax s n, Chief Nuclear rials Safety and Sa eguards Branch l

Enclosures:

1 Notice of Violation 2. Inspection Report No. 50-341/86009(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) te w/ enclosures: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. f44rquardt, Corporate Legal Department . Resident Inspector, RIII l IE File IE/DI/ORDE IE/ES t' NMSS/SGPL NPR/DL/SSPB ACRS l cc w/ enclosures, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION: DCS/RSS (RIOS) 3 Licensing Fee Management Branch i Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission I i Harry H. Voigt, Esq. { Nuclear Facilities and - ~; Environmental Monitoring Section Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness Enclosure contains SliFEGUARDS INFORFAi!CN Upon separatism this Ij page is cecontroited % P RIII III RIII RI RIII i\\ f '] **' h Qfis k W Is G

( ja % 40 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/86009(DRSS) Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-33 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company i 2200 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant f fnspection At: Plant Site i Inspection Conducted: March 10-14 and 25, 1986 Date of Previous Physical Security Inspection: January 27-30, 1986 1 J Type of Inspection: Reactive Physical Security Inspection k./_f.,,/,./.. Nf/ ?6 !nspectors: m, ^

i. J /Padeda Date /

Physical Security Inspector i YA f/ Bh L. Pirtle Date hysical Security Inspector Approved By: ( k/N6 ) . R. Creed, Chief Date 2 afeguards Section li fnspection Summary j fnspection on March 10-14 and 25, 1986 (Report No. 50-341/86009(DRSS)) Areas Insoectec: Included Management Effectiveness; Security Program Audit; i Physical Barriers - Protected Area; and Safeguards Information. The inspectors reviewed licensee corrective action on several "open items." 2 l Results: The licensee was found to be in compliance with NRC requirements within the areas examined during the inspection except as noted be. low: 1 Safecuards Information: Safeguards Information procedural requirerrents were not complicc with pertaining to security storage containers and lock Cc-bination Chaeges. In addition, f:ve "c;en items" were closed basad en NC review of licensee's corrective measures. Ecc1csure contains (Details: UNCLASS FIED SA~EGUA: IDS INF :iMATION) SAFEGUARCs Ihrc u rroy yconseparationthis & M i/ i / / - / ~678 Is Cecc. l bv v 7s g ( 7 + .Jf, " trolled.

,..ggy e a 3 o SAriGL ADS FORMAT 0F w-wy MAY 0 21986 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTh: Frank E. Agosti Vice President kuclear Operations 6400 Ncrth Dixie Highway New,, ort, MI 48166 Gentle =en: This refers to the special physical security inspection conducted by Mr. G. L. pirtle of this office on January 27-30 and March 10-14, 1986, of activities at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Cperating License No. NPF-33 and to the discussion of the general nature of the allegations with Mr. F. Agosti and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection, f" The enclosed copy of our inspection report ider.tifies areas examined during ec the inscection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel, ho violations of NRC requirements were icentified during the course cf this inscection. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report till be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. The attachment to this inspection report concerns a subject matter which is exempt from disclosure according to Part 73, Title 10, Code cf Federal Regulations, Sect' ion 73.21(c)(2). This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 73.21. Consecuently, the attachment to this inspection report will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Rcom. a Enclosure Contains SAFEGUARDS 1NFCRP.AT!0h' Upon Separation Tnis PaSe Ic Decentrolled, c '0 / r^) '84asmua SA?iGJAUS N?0RN AT,!0N r

s 6 SA. iGJA,1JS 1:01VE0X The Detroit Edison Company 2 MAY 0 21986 We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection. Sincerely, h, (fack A.' Hind, Director D.tvision of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-341/86006(DRSS), w/ attachment (UNCLASSIFIED, SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosure: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department IE File IE/DI/0RPB IE/ES NMSS/SGPL '. NRR/DL/SSPS ACRS cc w/ enclosure, w/o attachment (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION): DCS/RSS (RIDS). Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Monree County Office of Enclosure Contains Civil Preparedness SAFEGUARDS INFORi% TION Upon Separation This hse 'Is Decentrolled 9 RIII j RII,I RIII ~ R RIII i w, y .t g w s Pirtle/jp .ed A9e14 Aeil Wfne 'Q\\n.h, 0 6 t' cljffy 5'lt!?J SAFIGUARDS INFORMATIOh

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-341/86006(DRSS)- Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-33 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Detroit Edison Company 2200 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 Facility Name: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Inspection At: Plant site Inspection Conducted: January 27-30 and March 10-14, 1986 Type of Inspection: 2pecial Physical Security Sli Inspector: % ^ G. L. Pirtle ~ Date Physical Security Inspector Reviewed By: 86 /J/. R. Creed, Chief Date M afeguards Section l Approved By: WN ) f / [h W. L. Axelsofi, Chief Date Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Insoection Summary ) Inspection on January 27-30 and March 10-14,1986 (Report No. 50-341/86006(DRSS)) Areas Inspected: Included management effectiveness of the security program in reference to allegations received by U.S. NRC, Region III. Results:.The licensee was found to be in compliance with NRC, requirements within the areas examined. Two findings of an administrative nature were noted. The job. description of the security staff supervisor needs to be revised to include some responsibilities addressed in the security plan for i that position. Parameters pertaining to report generation from the security computer system need to be established. n l l l i i 9/rn C#Q # # d > n uw1 - vant/ clpf-

The attachment to this inspection report contains details of a concern pertaining to report generation on the security computer system. The concern is not directly related to any of the allegations, but requires licensee action. The information in the attachment is considered Unclassified Safeguards Information. I i 2 i L

& A CL,eG Frers E. Agos v.c. prn.een ti NJC4t' Oper atsons J,.fQjI r.,mir umonn o...e m.e.,. s .C ISOn =Newpon V cNgan 48'E6 F ~,* smaums womax nav_8 1986 ( { gr,s, VP-66-0067 Er. James G. Keppler Eegional Administrator 7,egion III 11 S. Nuclear Regulatory Corn:nission 799 Rooscvolt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Oear Mr. Keppler: Eeference: Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43 Fubject: Detroit Edison Response Inspection Report 50-341/86009 This letter responds to the notice of violation included with your Inspecticn Report No. 50-341/86009. This inspection was conduc ted by Messrs.

7. J. Madeda and G.

L. Firtle of URC Eegion III on March 10 through 14 and 25, 1986. We trust this letter satisfactorily responds to the notice of ciclation cited in the inspection report. If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Joseph E. Conen, (313) 586-5083. Sincerely, e +-4 [ 51) cc: (* with attachment) Mr. M. D. Lynch Mr. W. G. Rogers

Mr.

G. C. Wright e /. USNRC Document Control Desk 2$ Washington, D. C. 20555 LHE:' ST~AF !E: Fr C:" Z::Ci DF"tIF,

t. ': 'L E Tr:E r:C"::E:'T T r D E CO:C ECL'_E;.

h y w_2.. h e ! M m g M J.C,d x s/iq% h fr. F R : W b%.w g QgLcqu.nh MG 3:= - -na na - n a~ '.. f ; , Q/ a -*M., h[Oby^dbh 7 3kiEU,I.S33 Ed3EO!AIION l

.asa" g. L. W. HASTING MAY 21 $86 May 15, 1936 p, EN 86-31 ' L, o

g., g OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT ENFORCEMENT ACTION js Licensee:

Detroit Edison Company b' 33 Docket No. 50-341

Subject:

PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY - 550,000 This is to inform the Commission that a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of Fifty Tnousand Dollars (550,000) will be issued on or about May 20, 1986 to Detroit Edison Company. This action is based on multiple security violations, one of which involves the, falsification of required records by a security guard. It should be noted that the licensee has not been specifically informed of the enforcement action. The Regional Administrator has been authorized by the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, to sign this action. The schedule of issuance and notification is: Mailing of Notice May 20, 19S6 Telephone Notification of Licensee May 20, 1986 A news release has been prepared and will be issued 24 hours from tha time the licensee receives the Notice. The State of Michigan will be notified. The licensee has thirty days from t'he date of the Notice in which to respond. Following NRC evaluation of the response, the civil penalty may be remitted, mitigated, or imposed by Order..

Contact:

P. Robinson, IE 29583 J. Axelrad, IE 24909 Distribution: H Street MNSS Phillips EW Willste Chairman Palladino EDO NRR IE NMSS l Comm. Roberts DED/ROGR OIA RES Comm. Asselstine PA 01 l Comm. Bernthal ELD' AEOD l Comm. Zech RM' ACRS SECY Air Rights Regional Offices MAIL CA SP RI RIV ADM: Doc. Mgt. Br. l PE RII RV PDR RIII l ( OEELIMINtEY INECEMAIICN - NCI UCE EL3LIC C!3C'_C32EE L'i IL N i 21, 195E ~ l l l l f fI ~ I rI I k '4'.Y 24 f !. /9 f p r-n n e r 2-I o uwcw'og ]f l

arca ~- .c A r t O M O I Q 1 $_7 /W mm The Detroit Edison Company 2 MM 2 01986 The NRC is particularly concerned with violation No.13 which relates to falsification of records by a member of the security guard force. The NRC views falsification of records which are required to be kept to be a serious Such records are required to be kept to enable a licensee to concern. adequately control the safety of its licensed activities. With regard to this particular instance, the NRC understands appropriate disciplinary action has been taken. Noretheless, close licensee attention is needed to a ssure no recurrence of this problem. To emphasize the importance the NRC places on effective management of the security prograt as well as the importance of personnel maintaining accurate and complete records required by the security plan, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) for the violations described in the enclosed Notice. Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C violations described in the enclosed Notice have been classified as a Severity Level III problem. problem or violation is $50,000.The base value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level III The NRC Enforcement Policy allows for reduction of a civil penalty under certain circumstances. Consideration was given to reducing the civil penalty by fifty percent because of your extensive corrective acticns which included: analysis commitments pertaining to access control violations, naintenance(1) in support, and f.e.:urity reportable events; (3) an increased security surveillance (4) a cetailed 100% audit of all authorized access records; prograr (5) acce;lerated activity on Engineering Design Projects pertaining systems; and (6) proposed long term corrective actions to add,ress adverse trends, organizational responsibilities, and review and revision of security plans. However, because of the pervasive nature of the violations and due to the cultiple examples of violations in the area of access control, mitigation of the civil penalty is considered inappropriate. You are required to respend to this letter and should follow the instructiens specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. You should place all Safeguards Information as defined in 10 CFR 73.2I only in enclosures, so that your letter may be placed in the Public Document Room. In ynur response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necess compliance with NRC regulatory requirements. oIuU (OnI) WI0m:s !.v;milC:1 UPM Sep a ra tion This Na is t4contro!isd b $? "M '~"..~4t' W iE.'~')y ~ nmx>nmfwm %, V 7 ~, mhEd-

1(4 5295 025c3443 P.04 g enoD ~ F2' 2S2 ,y ~ The Detrott Edison Company 4 BAAY 2 01996 _ Distribution w/o enclosures: POR LPDR - SECY CA ACRS JTaylor IE RVollmer, IE JKeppler, RIII* JAxelrad IE PRobinson, IE' JLieberman, ELD Enforcenent Co rdinators RI, RII, RIII, RIV, RV FIngram, PA LCobb. IE VMiller, NMSS RBurnett, HMSS IE Fila IE/ES HMSS/SGDL NRR/DL/SSPB DCS Licensing Foe Panagerer.t Branch Resident Inspe: tor, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan P,ublic Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Montce County Office of Civil Prepare: ness w/ Safeguards Information 6 4 E.9 e ICJ J' "2 Co.i f 3IM ll y SAIL U4US INESEN 3 r w?:.s g;ySh1$$h;33'((h. --AkkD4E ?.sv ts :w.u"gy rd vnn s.n~av pyjW ngq n K

-.\\ . +,. ww. SAEG1 AUS 3 :01V A~0N l MAY 2 01986 Docket No. 50-341 l License No. NPF-33 EA 86-66 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen:

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES [NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-341/85047(DR55)] This refers to the special safeguards inspection conducted during the period November 12 through December 27, 19E5 at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, Newport, Michigan. The re sults of the inspection were discussed on January 17,19EE during an enforcement conference between Mr. C. W. Heicel and cthers of the D2troit Edison staff and Mr. A. B. Cacis and others of the NRC Region III staff. Tne violations icentified during this inspection resulted frc tne failure of your management cortrol system to assure adherence to the provisions cf your Ccemission approved physical security plan and related occuments. The number of problems identified reflect unacceptable levels of management performance and programmatic weaknesses in several key areas of the security program. While some of the violations may not be considered significant when viewed indivicually, the number of such violations ~makes it imperative that.you increase your efforts for sufficient management involvement to assure activities are performed in accordance with established procedures and practices. 4 l i i l l CERTIFIED MAIL l RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED l l l .m \\ / Y"i l( -~ _s En cI O! U."G COntOIns SAFEG'ND5 thT0iWATIOii 42 / o / g 2 /r 9MLd3 Upon separation Thb "WW"^## 3 '.n ' i { ? p !s CeccatrolN

7 I SAEGJABS V0MA"01 The Detroit Edison Company 2 p,g 2 () 1986 The NRC is particularly concerned with violation No.13 which relates to falsi'ication of records by a member of the security guard force. The NRC views f alsification of records which are required to be kept to be a serious Such records are required to be kept to enable a licensee to concern. adequately control the safety of its licensed activities. With regard to this particular instance, the NRC understands appropriate cisciplinary action has been taken. Nonetheless, close licensee attention is needed to assure no recurrence of this problem. To emchasi:e the importance the NRC places on effectise management of tne security program as weil as the importance of personnel maintaining accurate and complete records required by the security plan, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Insce: tion and Enforcement, to issue the entiosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Irposition of Civil Penalties in the amount of Fif ty Thousand Dollars (550,000) for the violations described in the enclosed Notice. In accordance with the " Gene al Statement of Felicy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2. Appendi> C (1955), the violations cescribed in tne enclosed Notice have beer classified as a Severity Level III problem The base value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level III prctlet or violation is 550.000. The NRC Enforcement Fclicy allows for reduction of a civil penalty under certain circumstartes. Consiceraticn was given to reducing the civil penalty by fifty percent because of your extensive corrective acticns which included: (1) increased au ': commitments; (2) trend analysis corritments pertaining to access control vic'a: ions, maintenance support, arc security recortable everts; (3) an inc-eise se:urity su velila.ce program; (4) a cetailed 2005 aucit cf all authori:ec a: cess records; (5) accelerate: activity on Engineering Design Proje :s pertaininc to security systems; and (6) proposed long term corrective acticrs to address acverse trencs, organizational responsibilities, and review and revisicn of security plans. However, because of the pervasive nature of the viola: ions ano due to the multiple exam:les of violations in the area of access control, mitigation of the civil penalty is considered inappropriate. You are require to respond to this letter and shoulc follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. You shoulc place all Safeguards Information as defined in 10 CFR 73.21 only in enciosures, so that your letter may be placed in the Public Docurent Roc In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to pr event recurrence. After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement actior is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements. h;?csun C:c:in SAFEGUARD $ m70 g gjg3 Upon Separat Tc*n ThIs PoS3 is Dccontrot ted SAFEGUARDS INFCfdMOB

s SA:EGUXUS NF03VA"0N The Detroit Edison Company 3 MAY 2 019 6 The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. Sincerely, CPIrir.a! s :. A. T.. t-r[,.l.fj~,", D' James G. Keppler Regional Actinistrator

Enclosures:

1. Notice of Violation and Prcpesed Imposition of Civil Penalties 2. Inspectior Report No. 50-341/55047(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosures: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marcuardt, Corporate Legal Depa-teent cc w/o enciesures: See Attached Distribution s\\0 f ic. nn g I IE:E$v EL'O. ES:D 'ad Prob'nson JLieb b RII t I y. JXep r xelr 5/c/86 5/ /86 1/8Y 5/p/86 5/i3/86 / 6 / "/ 4,/ y; R::- 24 h,i nc po q' 3 Da. ji-Al b S ta c i e to r./ r r En:leture Centair.s $/e;le' SAFEGU;:.DS INTO VjI!O!! v's g'8 f//t f/,y upon septreuen rna 4 Page is Cecentrolled SAFEGJJARDammwnmu

.\\ ~ SAEGUXDS 1201V A" 05 The Detroit Edison Company 3 WAY 2 01986 The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. Sincerely,

II UCI Fi

* >' L- (<,,. t e. c d b s '

e James G. Keppler Regional Administrator

Enclosures:

1. Notice cf Violation and Proposed Impositior, of Civil Penalties 2. Inspectior. Report No. 50-341/85047(DRSS) (UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION) cc w/ enclosures: L. P. Bregni, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marcuarct, Corporate Legal Departmer.: cc w/o enciesu es: See Attached Distribution I l ~

2d.

P l

s The. Detroit Edison' Company 4 MAY 201986 - Distribution w/o enclosures: PDR LPDR SECY CA ACRS JTaylor, IE RVollmer, IE JKepplar, RIII" JAxelrad, IE PRobinson, IE' JLieberman,. ELD Enforcement-Ccordinators RI, RII, RIII-', RIV, RV .FIngram, PA LCcbb, IE VMiller, NMSS RBurnett, NMSS IE File IE/ES NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPE DCS Licensing Fee Management _ Branch Resident Insrector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voigt, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental-Monitoring Section Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness w/ Safeguards Information i Enciesure Contains SAFEGUARDS IH70gnp7;og Upon s_eparation This Pas: Is SecoamaaAAno

MAY 2 8 1988 Docket No. 50-341 The Detroit Edison Company ATTN: Frank E. Agosti Vice President Nuclear Operations 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 Gentlemen: This confirms plans as discusr.ed recently between Mr. R. Woolley of your staff and Mr. G. Wright of my staff to conduct a meeting at 9:30 a.m. (CDT) on June 3, 1986, at the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III office in Glen Ellyn, Illinois. The purpose of the meeting is for the Independent Overview Committee to brief us on its evaluation of Detroit Edison Company Management as it pertains to Fermi 2. We will discuss any question you may have concerning this matter. Sincerely, vcri;ir,-! Signed 'y E.G. Grarr a" Charles E. Norelius, Director Division of Reactor Projects cc: J. E. Conen, Licensing Engineer P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department DCS/RSB (RIDS) Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Harry H. Voight, Esq. Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness RII RI ' RII,'g? M (G[li L /0 \\t'h,./kst ./ N o re,iM /g '{, ] G mond @*MMW 3 o,-,~---,,, P -.}}

ML20207G059

Text

SUBJECT:

Enclosures:

:-- r

Enclosure:

Subject:

Dear Mr. Agosti:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Agosti:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Dear Mr. Jens:

Enclosure:

Enclosures:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Enclosures:

Dear Mr. Jens:

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Reference:

Subject:

Subject:

Dear Mr. Jens:

Enclosure:

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Agosti:

Enclosure:

Enclosures:

Enclosure:

Subject:

Contact:

SUBJECT:

Enclosures:

Enclosures:

Navigation menu

Search